PDA

View Full Version : United States Grand Prix - Discussion



Vivski
19-06-2005, 01:49 AM
They're going almost 350km/h down that straight!!! That is unbelievably fast. Hands up if you've been 350km/h in a car...

Ralf Schumacher into his favourite wall. What are the odds. History repeats itself as he misses the US GP again.

The Red Bulls have new engines. 35bhp more they reckon. Couldn't have picked a better circuit for some more horses. But will it last an entire race? New engine, more power, you never know. For DC's sake lets hope it does. He's had a really good season so far, far greater than my expectations anyway.

McLaren look to have this one by the balls. If the Renaults can qualify somwhere up the front then they might just get into the first turn infront and hold them off for a while. Ferrari looks nothing special. BAR might have some pace here, but like Williams, they're lacking a bit of speed down the straight. Williams will be hoping for a lot of retirements or a couple of safety cars just at the right time.

Will weather play a part? Looks fine and mostly sunny.

Pity it's on at 4am. As tempted as I am to go to bed early and get up for the race, I might have to tape this one.

^^v
19-06-2005, 02:31 AM
http://f1.racing-live.com/img/vide.gif
function openwindow(url,title,options) { window.open(url,title,options); }Michelin scrambling to solve tyre mystery
In talks with the FIA at Indianapolis
http://f1.racing-live.com/img/l3.gif
http://f1.racing-live.com/img/vide.gif


http://f1.racing-live.com/photos/imgactu/05/michelin-indianapolis_160605_220x159.jpg
Problems for Michelin at Indianapolis
Tyre manufacturer Michelin, which supplies all but three Formula One teams, was desperately seeking answers Saturday after it was unable to determine the cause of tyre failures in Friday practice for the US Grand Prix.

"Following the incidents of yesterday, Michelin has controlled all the tyres that ran during the session of yesterday morning and afternoon," a statement from Michelin said. "Despite all the checks that we've done, both here and in our test facilities in Clermont-Ferrand, we have not been able to understand or reproduce the problem of yesterday."

Michelin were concerned enough about the situation they were trying to have new tyres sent to Indianapolis from their headquarters in France.

"We've been working with our people in Clermont- Ferrand in order to identify a product that we know is capable of running at Indianapolis, and we are in a process of discussing this possibility with the FIA and are actively pursuing the dispatch of these tyres to Indianapolis," the Michelin statement said.

Left rear tyre failures led to crashes for two Toyota drivers, Ralf Schumacher and Ricardo Zonta, on Friday. Schumacher, who hit a barrier at speed, wasn't medically cleared to race and was to be replaced for the remainder of the weekend by the team's third driver, Zonta, whose tyre failure in practice had less dire consequences.

Michelin had also advised teams on car set-ups to maximize their tyres' safety, which they said should not hinder performance.

As changes were made by the teams, only two Michelin-shod cars posted times in Saturday morning's third free practice but in the fourth and final session, all were running on the full circuit.

E.A.
Source AFP

^^v
19-06-2005, 03:53 AM
Michelin runners to run at Indy?
Concerns over US Grand Prix participation
http://f1.racing-live.com/img/l3.gif
http://f1.racing-live.com/img/vide.gif


http://f1.racing-live.com/photos/imgactu/05/michelin-test_090205_220x158.jpg
Big problems at the US Grand Prix
It’s been a torrid weekend so far for Michelin at Indianapolis with reports now coming in from the French AFP agency that the French company is advising its teams not to take part in qualifying or the 73-lap US Grand Prix as things stand at the moment.

Michelin, in talks with the FIA, are looking at the feasibility of flying in a completely new batch of tyres from its French base for use in the race, but this requires authorisation from the FIA and agreement from Bridgestone.

After recommendations were issued by Michelin concerning tyre usage at Indianapolis, Flavio Briatore clarified the Renault F1 Team’s position on the situation.

“We fully support Michelin in this situation, and in the efforts they are making to best resolve it. They are flying out different tyres to use in tomorrow’s race – the same that were used in Barcelona for the Spanish Grand Prix,” explained Briatore. “The authorisation to use them has not yet been granted, but if that were not given, we would not compete in tomorrow’s race. The safety of our drivers remains our number one priority.”

E.A.
Source Renault

Vivski
19-06-2005, 05:08 AM
Scary stuff... not good for the drivers' confidence!

Trulli on pole!! He is SUPER light!! He must have 5 laps worth of fuel in that thing.
Button in third. That's another good qualifying effort by him.
Coulthard WAY off the pace in 16th. Heidfeld 15th! That makes Webber and Massa look pretty good.

JDM.Power
19-06-2005, 05:19 AM
indeed! trullie is super fast.
juan he made a little lock up! so he could of been up the grip a little more.
kimi is going to win! if he comes into the first corner an gets 1st. an just runs away an wins.

LUD02C
19-06-2005, 10:11 AM
Flavio Briatore has said, "if no new tyres, both Alonso and Fisichella are not racing"
That is amazing!

Ralf is also out of the GP, Zonta is taking his place!

LUD02C
19-06-2005, 11:48 AM
A few articles from ITV f1 webpage.




Formula 1 impresario Bernie Ecclestone has dismissed suggestions that the United States Grand Prix might not go ahead due to a mass boycott by the Michelin teams.

Having been unable to find an explanation for the tyre failures that the Toyota team suffered in practice yesterday, Michelin is seeking permission from the FIA to fly in a batch of new tyres of a different specification from those used so far at Indianapolis.



This is a hot potato as far as the governing body and Michelin’s rival supplier Bridgestone are concerned, since such actions would involve several technical regulations being waived.



If it is not allowed to run the new tyres, and doesn't make any progress in its efforts to get to the bottom of the problem, Michelin has said it will strongly counsel that its teams should not start tomorrow's race.



Ecclestone was due to hold a meeting with team bosses on Saturday afternoon, and claimed he was confident a way out of the impasse would be found.

“I think they [the Michelin teams] will find a tyre that will work and they will be able to start all right,” he told ITV-F1’s Jim Rosenthal.

When asked whether he expected a full grid of 20 cars to start the race, Ecclestone replied, “Absolutely. I am 100 percent sure it will happen.”

Ecclestone’s comments appear to indicate that he is prepared to support Michelin’s request in order to ensure that there is a race for the American public to watch tomorrow.

However, he implicitly accepted that the granting of special dispensation to Michelin could lead to protests from the Bridgestone teams and the race result ultimately being settled in the courts.

“I think if they do [run new tyres], they will be in breach of regulations – that’s obvious,” said Ecclestone.

“But I am sure the stewards will let them run and we will see afterwards what will happen."



Minardi boss Paul Stoddart has waded into the simmering controversy over tyre safety, warning that whatever decision is taken in the next 24 hours will have far-reaching repercussions.

Stoddart drew a parallel between Michelin’s request to be allowed to use a new batch of tyres in tomorrow’s race – in contravention of at least four F1 regulations – and his own campaign to be permitted to run 2004-spec cars in this year’s opening race at Melbourne.

On that occasion, Stoddart was involved in a stand-off with the FIA, winning an injunction from the civil courts that he should be allowed to enter his 2004 cars in the Australian Grand Prix only to finally relent and adapt the Minardis to conform with the 2005 regulations.

Stoddart, whose team runs on Bridgestone tyres, says he has sympathy for the predicament rival Michelin outfits find themselves in – but that the FIA would be acting inconsistently (make that hypocritically) if it were to allow the rules to be bent.

“The procedure is that 10 teams are going to have to agree something,” Stoddart was quoted as saying on SpeedTv.com.

“In the interests of safety I will agree, and let’s just say that Jordan and [Ferrari boss Jean] Todt, the other two Bridgestone runners, agree.

“You’re then going to have to have Max [Mosley]’s agreement, and Bernie [Ecclestone]’s agreement, so the 12 Concorde [Agreement] signatories are going to have to agree.

“Then Max has to request, I believe is the right word, the stewards to go along with it.

“The last time such a request was made, people will remember, was in Melbourne, when I had 10 signatures, and the stewards turned down such a request.

“They were sympathetic to it, but it was outside the regulations.

“This was clearly outside the regulations, so it will be interesting to see what happens.”

Stoddart claimed he was not raising these objections out of partisanship, but out of a desire to see the regulations applied on a consistent basis.

“I have the greatest sympathy for Michelin, it’s a great company, and I have great empathy with the teams that are affected by it,” he said.

“But there’s no clear-cut way out of this.

“Whatever takes place in the next few hours here, or perhaps even as much as the next 24 hours, [is] going to have far-reaching ramifications.

“If something is rushed through because of circumstances, I can’t see that not having wider ramifications down the track.”

One solution doing the rounds of the Indy paddock is that the Michelin teams could make a planned tyre change at some point during the race to fit a set used on Saturday.

Scheduled tyre changes are expressly forbidden in 2005, of course, and it is not clear what penalty would be assessed to teams that followed that policy.

“We don’t know [what the penalty would be],” admitted Stoddart. “At the start of the season we were told that the penalty was exclusion.

“I would not want to be in Max’s shoes today.

“At the moment the sympathy is with Michelin and the Michelin runners. No one wants to see anybody get hurt, and the whole issue of tyres and safety has come up again.

“How many drums have to be beaten before we wake up to the idea that the only way forward is a single tyre manufacturer and a single compound?

“It’s exactly what we all fought for, including sadly the teams that are being affected today.

“We all fought for it in Brazil last October, in November, in December, when Max cancelled the F1 Commission meeting that would have seen that get voted for.

“And now it’s in his latest proposals that he proposes that a single tyre should come in…”

LUD02C
19-06-2005, 11:50 AM
http://www.itv-f1.com/ImageLibrary/14734_1.jpg
Renault boss Flavio Briatore has threatened to withdraw his cars from tomorrow’s US Grand Prix unless permission is granted for Michelin to use a new batch of tyres flown in from its Clermont-Ferrand factory.
“We fully support Michelin in this situation, and in the efforts they are making to best resolve it,” Briatore said in a statement released by the team.

“They are flying out different tyres to use in tomorrow’s race – the same that were used in Barcelona for the Spanish Grand Prix.

“The authorisation to use them has not yet been granted, but if that were not given, we would not compete in tomorrow’s race.

“The safety of our drivers remains our number one priority.”

In order to be able to run tyres of a different specification to those nominated prior to the event – in contravention of the technical regulations – Michelin will require special dispensation from the FIA as well as the agreement of its rival Bridgestone-shod teams.

Vivski
19-06-2005, 12:58 PM
If Bridgestone are going to protest, they must protest BEFORE the race commences. Then when a faulty tyre explodes, they will face the consequences. If they protest AFTER the race then they are cowardly and unsporting.

Ofcourse it will require the FIA to waive the rules they are in breack of. But it is nothing like Soddard's claims... this is a matter of safety. The next time someone has a tyre failure in turn 13, they might not walk away. Soddard is a tool.

kenshin
19-06-2005, 05:28 PM
3:30 2005 Formula One Grand Prix

fark how come chan 10 is playing it at 3.30 am...

race starts at like 12 midnight melb time...

pornstar
19-06-2005, 05:28 PM
not true viv, rules are rules, and they have to be applied fairly/consistently. Like laws in society, the same is for the rules in competition, wihtout consistent application, whos to say that favouritism and other political aspects come into play, which clearly it would be (money being one of them when 14 cars are forced of the grid).

LUD02C
19-06-2005, 05:33 PM
not true viv, rules are rules, and they have to be applied fairly/consistently. Like laws in society, the same is for the rules in competition, wihtout consistent application, whos to say that favouritism and other political aspects come into play, which clearly it would be (money being one of them when 14 cars are forced of the grid).

100% agree!

Kenshin - Race starts at 4am east coast, coverage starts at 3:30am

^^v
19-06-2005, 06:15 PM
3:30 2005 Formula One Grand Prix

fark how come chan 10 is playing it at 3.30 am...

race starts at like 12 midnight melb time...

nope.. race starts at 4am aust EST...
they've shown it live for 2 consecutive rounds! :D

kenshin
19-06-2005, 06:44 PM
hmmm how come the barf1.com site countdown says race starts in 5 hrs?

lol

anyway... 14 cars on michellins...

if all michellins runners withdraw it wouldnt make it much of a race (everyone running pretty much will score in the points)

_CiVIC_
19-06-2005, 06:50 PM
what time does it start tonight on Channel 10 in Sydney???????

kenshin
19-06-2005, 07:58 PM
3.30... in melb which should be the same time as syd

check www.ten.com.au (http://www.ten.com.au/) :P

anyway gonna sleep now... waking up at 4.30

jackosimm
19-06-2005, 08:54 PM
should be interesting about this tyre issue, im hittin the hay now too

LUD02C
19-06-2005, 08:55 PM
I'm thinking about getting up.
I get up at 5:45 anyway for work, so whats an hour or so difference!
But its sold damm cold in Sydney, I might just tape it and watch the race tomorrow afternoon!

LUD02C
19-06-2005, 09:01 PM
Thinking about it now.
Bridgestone and there teams have denied Michelin to change the tyres, so has the FIA.
If Michelin have advised all there teams not to race Bernie has to cover all costs to the US GP people.

Contract is that 20 cars will be on the grid (or pit lane start) if not Bernie puts out the cash.

This is actually interesting, because if Michelin do get clearance which I believe they shouldn't rules are rules then what stopping Bridgestone at another track from changing the tyres due to safety.

Saying that, I don't want a 6 car race.
Well, this is going to be good.

I reckon its all a hype and all the teams will race!

edit: oh and BMW-Williams is about 15km/h slower on the straight compared to Toyota, Renault, Ferrari, McLaren, Sauber and Red Bull (mate just told me)
And as RPM said today, 20% maximum throddle around this track, you need that speed.

jackosimm
19-06-2005, 09:07 PM
hmmm this will be interesting indeed, its nice and cold on the coast, whip the heater out and have a nice coffee before the race, love it this time of year:thumbsup:

^^v
19-06-2005, 09:14 PM
edit: oh and BMW-Williams is about 15km/h slower on the straight compared to Toyota, Renault, Ferrari, McLaren, Sauber and Red Bull (mate just told me)
And as RPM said today, 20% maximum throddle around this track, you need that speed.

hmm maybe they're just running higher downforce than most other teams...
coz i remember reading .. that both aero options (low and not so low downforce) would result in pretty much the same lap time... just that one will be faster n on the straight than the other.. n vice versa for the infield..

LUD02C
19-06-2005, 09:18 PM
Could be man, but Williams have not been quick at all this year with top end and they aren't scared to say it.

How are the bridgestone going to hold up?
They have been improving abit each race and now Ferrari seem to be getting better qualifying results, could we see a Ferrari win soon even tonight?

redliner
19-06-2005, 10:30 PM
damn 4 am is jus too early for me this time
gonna miss all the dramas

Vivski
20-06-2005, 01:56 AM
Nah, I reckon it's bullshit. Rules, rules, then you have a defective tyre, tough titties, can't change it. It's bullshit. It's not in the spirit of the sport. Two cars' tyres have failed and turn 13 is not a corner where you want to fly into the wall... ask Ralf. Michelin flies in a bunch of tyres, quick swap, no advantage, the race goes ahead.

Don't want it to set a precedent? That's bullshit too. If the Bridgestones have a problem and both Ferraris have high speed crashes in practice from a tyre failure, get a new bunch of tyres in and swap them over. It's not a performance gain, it's not a trick, it's not against the spirit of the sport. It's two cars on the same tyres having the same tyre failure. The only problem here is that they're coming after qualifying, 'cos it's so bloody far away from the factory. Anywhere in Europe and it wouldn't be a problem to get new tyres for qualifying and the race.

Ferrari and Bridgestone have no right to bitch whinge, 'cos it's actually a disadvantage swapping from a tyre you've done all your setup and testing with to another unknown tyre.

If you want to get strict on the tyres, disqualify them all and have a USGP with 6 cars. Rules are rules.


I wonder why it only happened on the Toyotas.

.

^^v
20-06-2005, 04:05 AM
omg............................................... ....

all the michelin runners arent running in the race...

6 cars on the starting grid...........................

nEUROtic
20-06-2005, 04:06 AM
Man void the tips this week. Load of shit

SiR
20-06-2005, 04:09 AM
Absolute pwnage for the spectators!!!

^^v
20-06-2005, 04:11 AM
Man void the tips this week. Load of shit

i agree...

JDM.Power
20-06-2005, 04:14 AM
i wanna see a riot! YO!!!.
but oh wells! all the team are blaming the michelin company!

jackosimm
20-06-2005, 04:14 AM
lol this is boring

JDM.Power
20-06-2005, 04:16 AM
anyone up for a bet? LOL im gonna go back 2 sleep nows!
Ferrari 1-2!

**Ghost**
20-06-2005, 04:21 AM
i hope minardi gets a trophy... any trophy...they deserve one.....

jackosimm
20-06-2005, 04:33 AM
lol I can't believe it, its painfully boring. As much as I'd like to see Ferrari 1-2, this sucks:thumbdwn: lol.

Ah well, least itll boost us up in the points:thumbsup:

**Ghost**
20-06-2005, 04:36 AM
.. if michael and barichello actually celebrate with spraying champagne.... i'm going to lose all respect for them 4eva

its like celebrating that u won a punch-up witha 80 year old grannie whilst she was suffering an asthma attack

jackosimm
20-06-2005, 04:43 AM
True that, although, with all the rules these days they might be obliged lol!
Screw this im gonna watch a couple more laps, and hit the hay

**Ghost**
20-06-2005, 04:46 AM
can i just confirm...... jordan and minardi are running BRIDGESTONE correct?

CTR Coupe
20-06-2005, 04:52 AM
yep

Dylan
20-06-2005, 05:12 AM
What an absoloute FARCE!!

Here are my views:



I believe it is 100% Michelins fault that this situation arose, but the end result is 100% the FIAs fault.

FACT - MICHELIN:
- Michelin didn't have enough information about the track to build suitable tyres
- They realised they had unsuitable tyres on Friday, and tried to do something to rectify it
- They proposed that the only way they could race on the tyres they had was to build a chicane at the last corner, to minimise load on the tyres during the banked last corner.

FACT - FIA:
- Due to the FIA's arrogance, once again they stood firm in their regulations and chose not to budge

END RESULT:
- Thousands and thousands of dissapointed fans, millions of dissapointed TV viewers, millions/billions of potential money lost in the American market for Formula 1.

the ONLY way that the race could have gone ahead after it was realised that Michelin didn't have a suitable tyre was for the chicane to be built. As Martin Brundle said on the ITV coverage, there is a perfect option out there that would have rectified the situation. Build a chicane. No Michelin teams score points. All cars start the race.

All I can say is bring on the GPWC, then we can finally get rid of the FIA and Bernies crap for good.

kenshin
20-06-2005, 05:45 AM
can i just confirm...... jordan and minardi are running BRIDGESTONE correct?

dont think it really matters...

its like putting a sports tires on a '87 datsun...

SiR
20-06-2005, 06:02 AM
.. if michael and barichello actually celebrate with spraying champagne.... i'm going to lose all respect for them 4eva



It's all good mate...;)

SiR
20-06-2005, 06:03 AM
What an absoloute FARCE!!

Here are my views:



I believe it is 100% Michelins fault that this situation arose, but the end result is 100% the FIAs fault.

FACT - MICHELIN:
- Michelin didn't have enough information about the track to build suitable tyres
- They realised they had unsuitable tyres on Friday, and tried to do something to rectify it
- They proposed that the only way they could race on the tyres they had was to build a chicane at the last corner, to minimise load on the tyres during the banked last corner.

FACT - FIA:
- Due to the FIA's arrogance, once again they stood firm in their regulations and chose not to budge

END RESULT:
- Thousands and thousands of dissapointed fans, millions of dissapointed TV viewers, millions/billions of potential money lost in the American market for Formula 1.

the ONLY way that the race could have gone ahead after it was realised that Michelin didn't have a suitable tyre was for the chicane to be built. As Martin Brundle said on the ITV coverage, there is a perfect option out there that would have rectified the situation. Build a chicane. No Michelin teams score points. All cars start the race.

All I can say is bring on the GPWC, then we can finally get rid of the FIA and Bernies crap for good.

Agreed...

We're gonna hear a lot more about this over the coming days, weeks and months...

jackosimm
20-06-2005, 08:16 AM
man im tired! Pointless really. Sort of thing you just have to laugh at lol

Hondavirgin
20-06-2005, 09:08 AM
what a waste of time getting up early, went to bed after half of it once i heard button was walking out of the paddock.....

Berine's shot himself in the foot basically, i wouldn't be surprised if the US GP folds in a year or so after this debacle, who's going to go?!

Did they still spray the champagne?

nEUROtic
20-06-2005, 09:38 AM
So tipping voided this week? We got one agreement? Everyone else? UNLIKE f1 i think we make this a majority vote rather than a 100% haha

hihidamon
20-06-2005, 10:06 AM
man im tired! Pointless really. Sort of thing you just have to laugh at lol
lol! I waslaughing for the whole race through ... (waiting for the ferrari to retire - rb & ms to crash into each other, and minardis to go off, jordan to come to compelte stop with the toyotas) so that no ones is going to finish the race! A first for F1 in modern history...

What a joke! Max Mosley must resign now, for introducing the 1 tyre per race rule! Please sign for this petite here if you agree! :D

hihidamon
20-06-2005, 10:15 AM
This race we can see why Bridgestone has been a bit slack so far this season, as they did not wanted to build a tyre which is over the limit, unlike Michellin with their "super quick" tyres.

We should have sensed the problem was coming when Kimi broke his suspension in Nurburgring...... the Michellins are just too fragilly quick.

Full credits must go bridgestone in holding back speed from its tyres!

More importantly, this saga proves the inability of the FIA (Max Mo$ley) to improve safety and reduce costs, where safety and cost cutting were the main reasons for bringing out these stupid 05 regulations. And now, they want to reverse all the 04/05 regulations back to what it was in 08... What a bunch of idiots! :thumbdwn:

Hondavirgin
20-06-2005, 10:24 AM
Kimi's failure in the 'ring wasn't due to a fragile tyre, it was him flat spotting it, no-one else had any problems. Martin said there were 11 michelin tyre failures, or about to fail, at indy over the weekend.

I agree with the FIA on one count, they shouldn't modify the track because one tyre manufacturer couldn't handle it. I mean, what if it was the other way round and bridgestone runners withdrew so we still had a good race? would we have been as angry?

I don't know what they could have done, run slow through the turns (slow is still damn fast!) michelin send over new tyres and let them all change (let bridgey cars change too to keep it fair).

**Ghost**
20-06-2005, 10:52 AM
modifying the chicane should have been completely outta the question... that was a good call i do agree cos to modify the track itself by a large number of teams claiming it was "unique" and "unsafe" when its been around for years....

that woulda been equivalent to me asking the lamboghini murciliego i meet at the traffic lights to remove 5 spark plug wires before i run him... cso the v10 is "unique"

[ slayer ]
20-06-2005, 11:03 AM
this is so sad really, and considering there was a solution that coulda saved this from happening. screw the rules... i mean to say "oh well these are the rules" is all good and well, but is it worth killing the USGP? i dont think so...

and for all the teams to agree to a compromise except for the selfish and arogant ferrari along with the governing body makes it worse.

from what i read bridgestone had prior data on the effect from the new surface courtasy of IRL, whereas michellan did not have such data to use.

pure and simple, regardless of what coulda been done, nothing was done.

nEUROtic
20-06-2005, 11:19 AM
More importantly, this saga proves the inability of the FIA (Max Mo$ley) to improve safety and reduce costs, where safety and cost cutting were the main reasons for bringing out these stupid 05 regulations. And now, they want to reverse all the 04/05 regulations back to what it was in 08... What a bunch of idiots! :thumbdwn:

Yeah well a good way to save money is by not having races.

I get the feeling bernie (and Max) wouldn't care if it was just a 20 car ferrari championship :(

Admittedly there was a mistake made by michelin, but imagine if it was a one tyre manufacturer (as proposed). Then ALL cars would be unable to race. Bet a chicane woulda gone up quick smart then.

berniebern
20-06-2005, 11:29 AM
what a waste of time getting up early, went to bed after half of it once i heard button was walking out of the paddock.....

Berine's shot himself in the foot basically, i wouldn't be surprised if the US GP folds in a year or so after this debacle, who's going to go?!

Did they still spray the champagne?

Danica Patrick can save F1 in America provided she gets/wants a seat.

Pity the F1 didn't have the chance to showcase it's wares in a country dominated by the boring IRL and CHAMP car series. It's now hard to say that the F1 puts them to shame.

hihidamon
20-06-2005, 11:30 AM
Yeah well a good way to save money is by not having races.

I get the feeling bernie (and Max) wouldn't care if it was just a 20 car ferrari championship :(

Admittedly there was a mistake made by michelin, but imagine if it was a one tyre manufacturer (as proposed). Then ALL cars would be unable to race. Bet a chicane woulda gone up quick smart then.
I think similar things (not exact situation though) happened before in CHampcar at the michigan500 couple years back. The cars were lapping over 400kmh at one of the banked turn and some drivers (I was told the fact that most Champcars drivers were not as fit as F1 drivers - driver with tummys like bobby rahal could still race competitively hehe) felt dizzy and/or fainted during qualifying. They cancelled the race and refund the tickets for that year.

hihidamon
20-06-2005, 11:32 AM
Danica Patrick can save F1 in America provided she gets/wants a seat.

Pity the F1 didn't have the chance to showcase it's wares in a country dominated by the boring IRL and CHAMP car series. It's now hard to say that the F1 puts them to shame.

Hehe, F1 will have a chance if Danica Patrick gets to drive a F1 car in bikinis hehe :thumbsup: :D

Javed
20-06-2005, 12:28 PM
What a piece of shit. ALL the other teams said they would not race if the chicane wasn't put in, including Jordan and Minardi, except FERRARI. How ****in typical, Todt strikes again. Even though it is purely Michelin's fault, this behaviour is bullshit. Even Stoddart said he didn't want to race, but because the Jordans line up he did as well, to try and grab that podium I suppose. WEll i fkin hope you ferrari fans are pleased, the rest of the world is mega pissed off! Myself included.

**Ghost**
20-06-2005, 12:41 PM
what ferrari is doing is completely within regulations so they are beyond criticism in that respect

but it can be said that ferrari are about the MOST un-sportsman like team in F1... still remember that time when barichello had to pull over to LET shuey win a couple of years back... that was awful...

hihidamon
20-06-2005, 12:46 PM
What a piece of shit. ALL the other teams said they would not race if the chicane wasn't put in, including Jordan and Minardi, except FERRARI. How ****in typical, Todt strikes again. Even though it is purely Michelin's fault, this behaviour is bullshit. Even Stoddart said he didn't want to race, but because the Jordans line up he did as well, to try and grab that podium I suppose. WEll i fkin hope you ferrari fans are pleased, the rest of the world is mega pissed off! Myself included.
Well calm down mate, I guess you cant blame ferrari for this one. It was Michellin's own mistake, technically speaking Michellin and their teams should be the only ones to be responsible to the consequences, but their competitor ie bridgestone who produced 100% legal and safe tyres within the sporting limit. The situation is sad but Michellin cant expect the FIA/competitors to make adjustments to suit their unsafe tyres.

At the end of the day, it was the worst race I have ever watched in my entire life, as a F1 fan. :rolleyes:

THRUST
20-06-2005, 01:09 PM
It was a bad race but a simple soloution for the Michelin runners would have been just to go slower during that turn. sure they would have lost a couple of seconds but atleast it would have been better than this.

Michelin couldn't come up with the goods with a tire that could go so fast so go slower. Simple solution. I blame all the teams that didn't run.

Its not the FIA's fault as they didn't say that the michelin teams can't run

As for modifying the track to put in a chicane thats a joke

Dylan
20-06-2005, 01:59 PM
It was a bad race but a simple soloution for the Michelin runners would have been just to go slower during that turn. sure they would have lost a couple of seconds but atleast it would have been better than this.

Michelin couldn't come up with the goods with a tire that could go so fast so go slower. Simple solution. I blame all the teams that didn't run.

Its not the FIA's fault as they didn't say that the michelin teams can't run

As for modifying the track to put in a chicane thats a joke

There is NO way that slowing down through that corner is safe. As soon as you lift off the throttle in a F1 car, you slow down at a high rate because of the downforce. Imagine following another car around the track going around that banked corner and then they slow down and you plough into the back of them. I wouldn't really call that a good soloution either to be honest.

Vivski
20-06-2005, 02:11 PM
That part of the track was perfect for a chicane. It would have been so easy to put a left-right-left in there, paint it on and chuck some tyres out there. Then run the first 5 laps behind the safety car to let the drivers get used to it. Then away they go.

Then strip all the Michelin runners of their points and everyone is happy. The fans have a race, the manufacturers fight for the win and get exposure, the Brigdestone teams get their points. It would have been a quick thinking solution and a very interesting race.

Bernie's team is not capable of making a quick thinking decisions. They only know how to stick to their guns and not compromise. What we saw last night could have been avoided through a smart decision, but what happened was a very dumb solution.

Now everyone is left feeling dirty. And who wins? No-one wins, everyone loses. Not even Ferrari wins, 'cos now they're hated even more. Very un-sporting. The illusion that F1 is a sport was blown apart last night.

Michelin are accepting the blame for not having the right tyres. But everyone knew that on Friday. 7 cars' tyres were inspected and were on the verge of failing. That was 2 days from the race. 2 days to come up with a good sporting solution. The solution was a 6 car race which will cost everyone a lot of money and scar the US F1 GP for years.


I'm appaulled, but not surprised, that a good solution could not be found so we still had a good race to watch while Bridgestone teams still got their points.

But it was hysterical when Michael and Rubens almost came together!! Haha.

berniebern
20-06-2005, 02:52 PM
As for modifying the track to put in a chicane thats a joke

They cut the greens differently in golf all the time to be more/less competitive so why not alter the course in F1? It therefore should have been turned from a race into a spectacle. Afterall, the US grand prix is still relatively new and the exposure is needed in arguably the most lucrative and untouched market (refer last paragraph). All Michelin teams agreed to forfeit any points if there was a change to the track so it should have been done, for the sake of F1.

*** The brickworks track attracted 300,000 for the indy 500 a few weeks ago. Only 150,000 turned up to the F1.

Dylan
20-06-2005, 03:05 PM
That part of the track was perfect for a chicane. It would have been so easy to put a left-right-left in there, paint it on and chuck some tyres out there. Then run the first 5 laps behind the safety car to let the drivers get used to it. Then away they go.

Then strip all the Michelin runners of their points and everyone is happy. The fans have a race, the manufacturers fight for the win and get exposure, the Brigdestone teams get their points. It would have been a quick thinking solution and a very interesting race.

Bernie's team is not capable of making a quick thinking decisions. They only know how to stick to their guns and not compromise. What we saw last night could have been avoided through a smart decision, but what happened was a very dumb solution.

Now everyone is left feeling dirty. And who wins? No-one wins, everyone loses. Not even Ferrari wins, 'cos now they're hated even more. Very un-sporting. The illusion that F1 is a sport was blown apart last night.

Michelin are accepting the blame for not having the right tyres. But everyone knew that on Friday. 7 cars' tyres were inspected and were on the verge of failing. That was 2 days from the race. 2 days to come up with a good sporting solution. The solution was a 6 car race which will cost everyone a lot of money and scar the US F1 GP for years.


I'm appaulled, but not surprised, that a good solution could not be found so we still had a good race to watch while Bridgestone teams still got their points.

But it was hysterical when Michael and Rubens almost came together!! Haha.

Exactly. :thumbsup:

Jus-10
20-06-2005, 03:30 PM
Man i am so tired...it's now just after 3pm and I have been up all night (except for a 1hour power-nap whilst Ace Ventura was on)

So I am one of the suckers that stayed up and watched the entire race...I think I was just so tired that it sort of bored me in to a dull sense of nothingness...by the end it was 6am and the wife was getting up to go to work...

I feel sorry for all the teams involved...it was a major f*ck up. But then if you want controversy, F1 can usually deliver!

To pin any blame at all for this on Ferrari is absolute rubbish...so they didn't back the rest of the teams (who run Michelin and were obviously affected)...big deal. They technically had no reason or justification to pull out. As someone breifly touched on earlier, what would have happened if the situation was reversed? OK it's merely speculation, but can anyone here honestly imagine, Renault, McLaren, Toyota, BAR, WIlliams, etc backing Ferrari (no one would be too fussed about Jordan and Minardi as they aren't a threat)?? Come on, of course they wouldn't...it would have simply been added as another problem to Ferrari's troubled season....

As for Bridgestone having knowledge about the resurfacing of the track, we know that their affiliate company, Firestone, provides tyres for one of the US series of car races. OK so what?! It's a big friggen track...it's not top secret and any half-wit would have considered the developments/changes to the track when assessing the tyre needs for the weekend...It seems like it should be standard procedure to me.

Perhaps Michelin were just getting a bit too cocky and relaxed a bit knowing that Bridgestone had been off the pace all year?

A retrospective opinion is pretty easy to give, and to be honest I don't know what the true answer/solution should have been. Michelin screwed up and that was the beginning. The FIA then failed to attempt to resolve the issue...No one had the balls to make a call so everything turned to sh*t....That's what we know and it sure will be interesting to see what comes of this!

pornstar
20-06-2005, 03:53 PM
Yeah thats right blame the FIA :rolleyes: Come on, how is it the FIA's fault.

ONE tyre per race rule, wasnt introduced overnight, it was introduced at the start of the season.

FACT: Michelin ****ed up, they can bring 2 tyres, if they arent sure, they bring one racey and one safe option, they didnt bring a safe enough one. If they dont have enough info about the track, wouldnt u bring an even safer tyre to cover that base? Michelin ****ed up.

FACT: Ferrari and Bridgestone are not at fault, they did everything within the rules, if Michelin cant do their job, get out of the F1, as everyone has said, its the pinaccle of motorsport, if ur not at the pinaccle, go and sponsor hyundai gp or something.

FACT: Making a chicane to slow the cars down is nonsense, Webber has already touched on the fact that you cant just put in a chicane and expect drivers to be able to take it safely albeit at a lower speed without ever seeing it, driven it.

FACT: FIA might hvae made shit rules, but they have been in place all year round.

Bring on the 1 tyre manufacturer I say, and get rid of Michelin, Bridgestone supplies all teams, allow them to develop gearboxes etc but tyres have a control tyre.

And yeah, good work "god" you finally broke ur drought, u won in 2005. :thumbdwn:

JDM.Power
20-06-2005, 04:10 PM
do i get 1point? since i got Trulli right?? he came 7th ....but he didnt start.

Hondavirgin
20-06-2005, 04:17 PM
Yep, blame for this incident is primarily with michelin, bottom line, they pushed the envelope a little too far and got done. Then, the FIA, Bernie and the teams compunded the problem by not thinking up a solution or being sensible.

However, if michelin knew about this 2 days beforehand then why not fix it, they couldn't really expect a track to be modified to fix their problems could they? I think they actually flew replacement tyres in, and Charlie Whiting said they would allow tyre chages during the race for safety reasons (i.e. you can come in and replace the tyres and we wont penalise), but they didn't take that.

Jus-10
20-06-2005, 04:31 PM
Here is a link to the transcript of the press conference:

http://www.grandprix.com/race/r740sunpc.html

I love this one:

Q: (Joe Saward - F1 Grand Prix Special) Can I ask all three of you, if your tyre manufacturer said to you that your tire couldn't make it more than ten laps, would you race?

Barrichello: There was only one solution. If the problem was on 13, just come into the pits every lap.

Everyone is going to (or is Andy :p ) hang sh*t on Schumey for this...he has never said anything about how proud he is of the victory or anything of the sort. I mean give him some credit - I think after 84 previous GP victories he has some sort of an idea of how to win a GP legitimately.

What were Ferrari supposed to do? Not race and then face backlash for breaking some other rule? They officially had no reason not to race. Whilst the Michelin teams withdrew on the direction of Michelin, Ferrari would have been withdrawing for no reason other than a moral one, and no doubt they would have suffered...

We know Ferrari can be a bit cold and lacking in morals at times, but they were in a compeletely different situation to the other teams as they were technically not affected in any way...

No doubt it will make the Ferrari-haters hate Ferrari even more.

Vivski
20-06-2005, 04:51 PM
FACT: Making a chicane to slow the cars down is nonsense, Webber has already touched on the fact that you cant just put in a chicane and expect drivers to be able to take it safely albeit at a lower speed without ever seeing it, driven it.
Are you suggesting that the best drivers in the world could not handle a chicane? If rally drivers can do it, then so can F1 drivers.
I'm not convinced that it would save the tyres, there may still have been tyre failures, but the risk of injury would have been significantly reduced.

It's not rediculous to put a chicane in. It would be an interesting challenge for the drivers and it would've been a really interesting race. Adding a chicane certainly would not have made it any more dangerous.

Ferrari would still have their points, but the US fans would have seen Kimi, Juan, Alonso, Fisi, Jenson, etc doing battle. Imagine if it was the Australian GP instead and you were in the crowd. Wouldn't you prefer to see some racing instead of a 2 car race?

The blame can be spread thin and wide. The majority is on Michelin, no-one is disputing that. But Ferrari, Jordan and the FIA cannot dodge criticism by pointing at Michelin. They too had a hand in the lack of a spectacle and the subsequent repercussions for F1 at Indy.

All three were within their rights and the all important rules to do what was done. But the rules are designed to uphold the spirit of Formula 1, to make it a great motorsport event. The rules betrayed the sport on this occasion.

That is my opinion. I blame Michelin for not having the right tyres. But I blame other parties for not finding a solution so I could get up at 4am to watch an interesting contest.

One good thing came out of it though. Had a few laps of onboard footage with the Minardis. They were working so hard just to keep the thing straight. As a driver, that was a lot of fun to watch.

Vivski
20-06-2005, 04:58 PM
I don't think people will blame the drivers. Michael and Rubens were both saddened by the race. They'll take the points and they're entitled to do so, but Michael acknowledged that it was not a sweet victory for him.

The drivers were just as helpless as the crowd in this one.

Hondavirgin
20-06-2005, 05:01 PM
Are you suggesting that the best drivers in the world could not handle a chicane? If rally drivers can do it, then so can F1 drivers.
I'm not convinced that it would save the tyres, there may still have been tyre failures, but the risk of injury would have been significantly reduced.

It's not rediculous to put a chicane in. It would be an interesting challenge for the drivers and it would've been a really interesting race. Adding a chicane certainly would not have made it any more dangerous.



I think what he was referring to an saying was that changing the track and sending them out to race through a chicane they have never seen before, requiring braking from high speed on a turning bit of track, isn't feasible.

and its just wrong to change a track coz someone isn't fast enough (they could have gone slow through the corner, its not realistic, but its possible).

THRUST
20-06-2005, 05:03 PM
There is NO way that slowing down through that corner is safe. As soon as you lift off the throttle in a F1 car, you slow down at a high rate because of the downforce. Imagine following another car around the track going around that banked corner and then they slow down and you plough into the back of them. I wouldn't really call that a good soloution either to be honest.

Who said anything about slowing down for the corner, I said just to go slower and so did the FIA, they managed to get thru alright on the warm up let, just go super slow.

And they wont plough into the back of each other as they'll be expecting them to brake similarly. These f1 drivers can adapt you know...

Vivski
20-06-2005, 05:08 PM
It's not realistic and it's dangerous. I don't see how it's not feasible to change the track. If done properly it would not be dangerous, the track is wide enough for it. It would be a level playing field for everyone.

I referred to rallying, 'cos they drive on the limit without seeing the course more than a few times. I'd love to see how the F1 drivers dealt with it. It would sort the awesome drivers from the great ones.

It would not be unfair to anyone, 'cos Michelin would not be racing for points. But it would be a lot of fun and worth staying up 'til 6am for.

Hondavirgin
20-06-2005, 05:18 PM
I wasn't suggesting they go slow through that corner, thats why i said it wasn't realistic.

Rally drivers are not travelling at 290km/h+ an inch off the ground when they come up to those bends either, and they have also driven through them at least twice on the recci.

7th Gen
20-06-2005, 05:29 PM
interesting discussion guys, thank god i did not stay up for it

i agree with a few of the others that we forfeit this round in the tipping comp?

Jase? your thoughts?

h17am
20-06-2005, 05:41 PM
So a lot of people think that the chicane needs to be put in so the michelin runners can run safely and get to the end of the race. If that happened, maybe Bahrain circuit needed some changing as well, so that Rubens tyres lasted till the end of the race and maybe get a podium. Or in Monaco so the two renaults wouldn't slow down everyone. I think it is just silly the circuit should be changed so they can run safely. Michelin was allowed to have the new tyres + penalties, but the new tyres also wasn't safe enough. They can change the tyres based on safety issues, but they want a chicane instead. They can go through the pit every time to avoid running on turn 13, but they want a chicane instead. Where is the fairness to the bridgestone runners if the chicane was put on? Like above maybe Monaco and Bahrain needed to be changed as well, so the tyres would last. As for someone saying Michelin haven't got the experience to bring suitable tyres... thats just utter bollocks. The event has been on for 6 years, and if they still don't have the experience to bring suitable tyres, then maybe we should have NANKANG instead of Michelin in F1.

Another thing is, Stoddart is a complete TOOL. Read Minardi's Press Release and you'll think he's a TOOL too. He thinks that the US GP would have ran without problems if the solution (bring in the chicane) was approved. So he's blaming the FIA and Ferrari for not supporting the idea. How can FIA approve such a chicane when it is clearly in the interest of the Michelin runners? How fair of a solution would that be? And Stoddart should maybe consider having a team that actually have a chance in the world championship. He doesn't care about not racing the USGP because his car sucks anyway and he's most probably not going to score any points. In my view, whether relevant or not, the race totally sucked and it was bad for the sport. FIA did the right thing and not aprrove the chicane, Michelin should be kicked in the nuts over and over again for not racing when they could have, by either going through the pits every lap to avoid running turn 13, changing the tyres in pitstops which is allowed under safety considerations.

[ slayer ]
20-06-2005, 05:48 PM
sure everyone all over the world is saying ferrari had the rules to back up their decision, FIA was backed up by rules... etc etc etc.... but who really cares? im the grand scheme of things this cheated the fans who were there and spent considerable money on the entire holiday/GP weekend many took, and it cheated us poor people who got up early to watch...

rules are rules, yes. but the grand picture is a responsibility to the fans. without the fans advertising will/would stop and then no more F1... extreme yes, but then wot good would the rules be?

i just feel something could have been done to save the race, but nobody wanted to make concessions for the good of the sport.

jackosimm
20-06-2005, 06:21 PM
like said a thousand times before, its not a sport, its a business

Zdster
20-06-2005, 06:23 PM
The way that I see it is that the only winner out of this entire thing is Tiago Monteiro :) .


I think it is a little to simplistic to put the blame on just one party. No matter what would have happened there would have been an outcry. If the track was changed teams such as Ferrari who were ready to run would have been penalised (for something that was not in there control - tyres). As it stands now there is upset. I am not sure what the answer should have been.

The people that I really feel for is the fans. Could you imagine travelling half way across the country, spending heaps of money on travel/accomodation/tickets to see that race?

At the end of the day as others have mentioned it was really a question of is F1 a sport (in which case everyone should have run with a modified track) or a business? It will be interesting to see what happens with the F1 race in the US in the future.

Zdster
20-06-2005, 06:29 PM
Oh and another thing - related to Channel Tens coverage. What is with these guys? Melbourne takes prime to viewing. Over the GP weekend in OZ virtually nothing else is on. Then every other round is shown in the night (sometimes live). If they are building up such a big fan base, why not replay the race during normal hours! :confused:


Signed someone sick and tired of being up to late :D

civ_sik
20-06-2005, 06:31 PM
not really the racing part is a sport for the drivers, but the rest is business but f1 is getting really fukd up atm

jackosimm
20-06-2005, 06:32 PM
its always nice to have the race live or slightly delayed, rather than the next day. A replay of it would be good, but why would they do that when it wont make them anymore money?
Michelin made a mistake, the teams suffered because of it. Done.

Jus-10
20-06-2005, 07:31 PM
[QUOTE=h17am]Michelin should be kicked in the nuts over and over again/QUOTE]

Farkin beautiful!!!! :D

I can't wait to see the qualifying for the French GP...how they organise that now seeing as though they were saying something about the order they went in to the pits is the order in which they will qualify....

GO BRIDGESTONE....GO FERRARI :thumbsup:

LUD02C
20-06-2005, 08:44 PM
Well, what can I say?
Was it a F1 race? NO!
It was a business deal gone wrong!

If all the tippers can please PM me on if they want to make this round null and void, so everyone gets 0.

Now, to the race.
I taped it and watched it this afternoon, even though I was very upset I did still watch it for 1 main reason, to hear from the drivers!

This was bad for F1.
If you saw the race, you heard that Frank Williams held a Michelin only team meeting, its amazing how all the Michelin runners are the ones that want to have a seperate series!
So the meeting would be great for them, why?
Because these guys never get time to sit down and talk and actually have time to discuss major issues as well as agree on them!

The whole "make a chicane" is ridiculous!
You can't make a chicane with 30 min to a GP.
The drivers could do it no worries, but why should Bridgestone runners be penalised?

I have to agree with both FIA and Michelin on this, safety of drivers is number 1 in my books and the team bosses did do the right thing!
BUT
Rules are rules so, just like every driver they spoke to "no matter what you say, you'll be wrong"

Anyone see Klien getting information on sms in his car?
When they were on the grid.

Then another solution was "go slower around the last 2 corners"
You can't be serious can you?
They are F1 drivers, cars are made to go flat out around corners, not to comprimise there speed for the tyres.

I think the "Las Vages GP" is off the cards now, and Indy is in trouble after 2008.

One tyre supplier HAS to be in order now, what happened is a joke for US FANS!
Just let either Michelin or Bridgestone be the main supplier!

On a positive note, at least Minardi and Jordan got a lot of TV coverage, which is good for there sponsors!

Then Flabio came on the air and said, let us race with different tyres and gives us no points?
Good idea?
I think so, I still can't understand how the FIA mainly Charlie Brown didn't come up with a solution.

As Paul Stoddard said, you need to fix the problems up and start from the top. Bye bye Max and Bernie, they are killing the sport.
You saw Bernie at the start just yelling to Ron Dennis, Paul and Red Bull bloke "I DON'T CARE"

The biggest thing that mad me angry was the american idiots throwing bottles on the track.
That was the dumbest thing I've seen in F1 in my life.
Even Neil Crompton said "Half of them have no idea"

Then Michael squeezed Rubens out and made Rubens go on the grass and could of damaged his car and let a Jordan and/or Minardi get another podium.

At least the championship is close and interesting now, not the best way but thats life.

I hope this shakes the F1 tree and they get rid of these stupid rules and Bernie and Max both resign.

I could go on and on, but I won't.

LUD02C
20-06-2005, 08:50 PM
After the shame of the day before, F1 woke on Monday to begin counting the cost of what is being described as 'the most catastrophic public relations disaster in the 56-year history of the official world championship.' Or, to put it another way, F1's darkest hour.

The sight of 14 F1 cars pulling off the track at the end of the formation lap for the U.S GP and returning to the Indianapolis pits instead of racing is already being regarded as the death knell of the sport in the American market.

'Simply stated, this race is done. Forget what the contract says about future events,' read the Indianapolis Star’s obituary.

Tellingly, Speedway President Joie Chitwood immediately announced that the circuit held no commitment to invite F1 back in 2006.

"We're as much a victim of what transpired today as the fans are," he said. "Mr. Ecclestone is aware of our position and our unhappiness today."

Even Bernie, desperate to break the American market, admitted the sport's future on the other side of the Atlantic is bleak.

"I'm furious at the stupidity of it all. There should have been a compromise but we could not get one. I tried a million things and thought that if we could get them on the grid we were halfway there. But it did not happen," he complained. "We were just starting to build a great image in America on TV and with the fans. All of that has gone out of the window."

Such sombre realisation spread as far as the drivers.

"I find it hard to put into words how damaging this is for F1. It throws into doubt the future of the race in US," admitted David Coulthard. "Even if we do come back, half the crowd in the stands won't."

"It is a disaster for Formula One in the United States," added Nick Heidfeld.

The first bills for F1's most shameful episode are expected to be issued in the next few hours.

'Sponsors will be lining up to claim millions in compensation from the teams that did not run, while Bernie Ecclestone, the sport's ringmaster, could also be liable to pay huge compensation,' reported The Times.

The scene of this shameful debacle, dare F1 forget, was the most ligitous nation on the planet.

Although there was no immediate announcement that refunds would or would not be issued, on Sunday night a notice on the front door of the Speedway's administration building indicated more information about refunds would be available on Monday.

With Bernie conceding "they've been cheated", F1 will be under huge pressure, both moral and legal, to issue full refunds to all the Indy spectators on Sunday.

Michelin, however, are likely to bear the immediate brunt of F1's shame.

The FIA are expected to charge the French tyre manufacturers, whose admission that their rubber was unsafe to use at Indy precipitated Sunday's shambles, with bringing the sport into disrepute this week.

The withering response of Charlie Whiting, the FIA's race director, to Michelin’s request for a chicane to be introduced, in which he scorned their failure to supply "correct tyres", is likely to be a mere taster of the FIA's response.

'We are very surprised that this difficulty has arisen,' he continued. 'As you know, each team is allowed to bring two different types of tyre to an event so as to ensure that a back-up (usually of lower performance) is available should problems occur. It is hard to understand why you have not supplied your teams with such a tyre given your years of experience at Indianapolis.

'That the teams you supply are not in possession of such a tyre will also be a matter for the FIA to consider in due course under Article 151c of the International Sporting Code.'

Under the terms of Article 151C, penalties can be applied for "any fraudulent conduct or any act prejudicial to any competition or to the sport in general".

Michelin's apparent incompetence could not be worst timed, coming just days after the FIA published proposals to limit tyre supply to just one organisation for 2008 and beyond.

Moreover, 'Michelin's failure to supply its teams with safe and durable tyres less than two weeks after it was warned by the FIA not to sacrifice safety for performance [after Kimi Raikkonen's tyre failure at the Nurburgring] could force the French tyre company's withdrawal from the sport,' noted The Guardian.

However, in mitigation, Michelin publicly announced their mistake nearly 48 hours before the grand prix began.

That the sport could then not reach a compromise for the sake of its reputation and image damns those far beyond the confines of Michelin.

"The bottom line is Michelin made a mistake. But after that the FIA had it in their hands to find a solution and ensure we all raced out there. The most important people, the fans, have been forgotten in all of this," noted Coulthard.

Jacques Villeneuve, meanwhile, blamed Ferrari for their failure to agree to the introduction of a chicane: “We could have raced with a chicane, if a chicane had been put before the banking, but Ferrari didn't accept."

Michael Schumacher's comment, "I don't know what Michelin's problem is, but this wasn't our problem," spoke volumes about Ferrari's intransigence ahead of F1's race of shame.

F1's blame game is set to explode in the coming days but the damage has already been done. On Sunday this was a sport that imploded.

The cost, which will perhaps never be fully appreciated, will be borne by all those shamed by their association to this reprehensible debacle.

tRipitaka
20-06-2005, 08:59 PM
the US crowd got ripped off.

LUD02C
20-06-2005, 09:08 PM
the US crowd got ripped off.

That might be so, but they didn't get ripped off by the teams in the race and throwing bottles and endangering the lives of these drivers is unacceptable.

Did you hear ITV talking to the US crowd?
I can understand the money issue and disappointment of them, Bernie should pay them back!

Vivski
20-06-2005, 09:18 PM
Hey Jase, your $10 on Schumey is looking a bit safer now isn't it?... :p

Obviously you can't build a chicane 30mins before the race. But it was on the cards way before that. They could have done it overnight. It would've been a statement of "we Americans do what needs to be done with our can-do attitude".

I don't know why everyone is saying Ferrari would be penalised if they altered the track and held the race and gave all the Michelin runners zero points. Ferrari would still get their 18 points, so where's the penalty?

And I think Crompton was referring to the crowd not having any idea what was going on... as in they didn't know why Michelin had pulled out. The crowd was very good in my opinion. Everyone was saying how good the crowd was, except for a few idiots who threw bottles and beer cans. Imagine if it had been in Europe! There would have been a riot.

Other than those points, yep I agree. And I vote for chucking the tips for this round in the bin.

I can't wait for Magny-Cours when all this is behind us and we're back to the great season we've been having. I really hope this weekend doesn't spoil the rest of the year.

LUD02C
20-06-2005, 09:23 PM
I don't think its gonig to ruin it for the die hard fans, but I was so angry when I watched it.
Just to know that they couldn't come up with a solution for the drivers safety.

Javed
20-06-2005, 09:32 PM
Blame does lie with Michelin, but not 100 percent. Michelin did everything they could to find a resolution just to get the cars on the track, knowing full well they would still be heavily penalised. It was not even their obligation to try and resolve the issue, but they wanted to try and get a USGP going. The FIA are to blame for the final OUTCOME, however yes Michelin are to blame in the first place. I still believe the Michelin company tried their best by their teams, and hence should not be as heavily criticised as they will of course be. Oh and to whoever suggested that the other teams would not care if it was a role reversal, i guarantee they would have agreed to let them run without scoring points. Briatore said he did not care about points he just wanted to go racing, and same with all the other teams I am sure. Shame FIA shame!

Javed
20-06-2005, 09:39 PM
Found this VERY interesting....


Sorry if this has been mentioned elsewhere, but I found this on planet-f1.com and I thought I'd cut it in. Basically it's about the concessions granted to Bridgestone in 2003 at Brazil. I found it interesting reading.

Back in 2003 you were only allowed to take one wet tyre to races, so you had to make your mind up before the event. Bridgestone arrived at Interlagos with their legendary intermediate tyre that was quite good in wet and mixed conditions. Michelin had a full wet that could run in more rain.

When the heavens opened before the race, Whiting delayed the start because the Bridgestone runners wouldn’t have been able to make it round safely. It was clearly Bridgestone’s fault for not bringing a full wet tyre, but as the argument has gone this weekend – they knew the situation…

After delaying the start the field was then sent round Interlagos behind the Safety Car until enough water was taken off the circuit.


Hmmmm..... Food for thought!

pornstar
20-06-2005, 11:15 PM
OK in response, Viv, When would the drivers get to drive the track with a chicane there? The first lap of the race? its not possible Viv, get on a race track and drive 100% on it with even an average street car, see if you can race on one without knowing a line or a way through it.... Its rubbish, you cant change track layout cos a tyre cant take it, if the tyre cant take it dont use it.

REMEMBER VERY VERY VERY CLEARLY: the teams could start the race, and then pit to change to a safer michelin tyre on the grounds of safety, charley whiting outlined this in his letter, he even said u wont get a black flag, but you would receive some penalty. Its BS that the michelin teams didnt just do this, if they have problems with their tyres on the grounds of safety, they CAN change it. Why those chose not too is anyones guess...

Its a sad sad day :( makes GPWC seem much more real now, I mean even if RBR goes to ferrari engines, imagine an F1 without the manufacturers....lol

h17am
20-06-2005, 11:31 PM
That's exactly right... they are allowed to change the tyres during the race, on the grounds of safety, but noooo lets put a bloody chicane in... pfft... Michelin is now putting the blame solely on FIA now for not resolving the matter.... omg... what are they going to do next? invade germany for WW2 revenge???... sheeshh....

^^v
20-06-2005, 11:41 PM
That's exactly right... they are allowed to change the tyres during the race, on the grounds of safety, but noooo lets put a bloody chicane in... pfft... Michelin is now putting the blame solely on FIA now for not resolving the matter.... omg... what are they going to do next? invade germany for WW2 revenge???... sheeshh....

in that case they woulda had to come in every few laps...
but yea.. woulda been better than not running at all...

Javed
20-06-2005, 11:43 PM
IF you pit so much guys.... engines will blow up. The end! So that resolution was rightly declined!

dc2dc2dc2
20-06-2005, 11:43 PM
that race was f****** thats all i can say. now the USA are definitely never gonna support F1 anymore. Most of them probalby came to watch Monty. i didn't even bother watching it, once it was official there was only gonan be 6 starters. BOO TO F1 bernie is killing it, and they wonder why they are running at such a loss.

^^v
20-06-2005, 11:49 PM
Jean Todt explains Ferrari's position
'Honestly, why should we compromise?'
http://f1.racing-live.com/img/l3.gif
http://f1.racing-live.com/img/vide.gif


http://f1.racing-live.com/photos/imgactu/05/todt-indianapolis_180605_220x154.jpg
'I mainly feel sorry for all the supporters' - Todt

After Sunday’s controversial United States Grand Prix at Indianapolis, Jean Todt clarified Ferrari’s position in the run-up to the situation which led to 14 Michelin runners peeling off into the pits at the end of the parade lap, taking no further part in the race.

But first Todt admitted that “I feel sorry about what happened, but I mainly feel sorry for all the supporters who were here, for the American supporters, for the TV viewers but it was not our decision.”

The reason why the Michelin runners took no part in the race was because they had unsuitable tyres on which they were recommended not to race. Compromises were sought from various sources to let the Michelin runners race, even for no points, but no solution was found.

At one point, a chicane was suggested in the quick banked corner at the end of the lap, where one of the Michelin tyre failures took place during practice. Todt explained that he was not consulted on this.

“We were never involved with those discussions,” said Todt. “Never involved. We were never asked about that. Whether we would have agreed or not is another question, and I tell you right now, to be sincere, we would not have agreed, but we were never asked about that. But is it serious to decide to put in a chicane half an hour without nobody testing it? It’s ridiculous.”


Todt did say that Bernie Ecclestone had talked to him about “different proposals, including a chicane, but again, it’s a matter of the FIA, it’s not a matter of the commercial rights holder (Ecclestone’s position). And I said that for me it was up to the FIA to decide.”

Continuing to explain his position, Todt pointed out that “number one, it’s an FIA decision. Number two, if something happened on the other side; if, for example, we don’t have enough grip for qualifying and we ask for three laps because we have good grip after the third lap, or if we ask for a chicane because we feel it would be safer for our tyres, I think everybody would laugh at us. So you just have to be prepared to react to a situation.

“You have two sets of tyres which you chose from, one normally is soft, the other one is hard and then you make your choice. I feel sorry for those who could not compete, but I feel more sorry, again, for the supporters.”

Todt then explained the disadvantages of the sudden installation of a chicane. “If we knew beforehand that there would be a chicane, we would have come prepared for a chicane. We would come with different tyres, we would have a different set-up on the car, we would have different gear ratios.

“Honestly, why should we compromise? We try to do a good job with Bridgestone, and we did not do a very good job with Bridgestone since the beginning of the year. We arrive, we are in a situation where we see from Friday that we are competitive, we don’t have any problem with tyres so for us it’s an opportunity.”

There was even a suggestion that the Michelin teams would compete for no points if a chicane was installed. But Todt’s reply was “would we have competed for no points? I say no. If this race would have been a race without points which cannot be, it would have been out of the FIA standard, we would not have started.”

Asked what sort of harm the boycott had done the image of Formula One, Todt replied “very bad. I wish we could come back to the States because it’s a very important country, it’s now our number one market, the States, and for so many years Bernie has tried to implement something in the States. Unfortunately, it was not the best demonstration today. It has been a hard hit for Formula One today.”

Todt explained that the teams had been warned about pushing the tyre situation to the limit. “We all got a letter two weeks ago warning us after the Monte Carlo race and after Nurburgring when Raikkonen had his problem, that we had to pay special attention to the tyres, the pressures, about all that, and it’s something we thought could happen for a while.”

Asked under what circumstances he would you have been willing to race with the Michelin runners, Todt said “I would say three options. One, they could have changed their tyres. Two, they would have to compromise in this specific corner. And three, they could have used the pit lane. If these cars cannot take this corner, what can I do? You would have had a race.”

Source Ferrari Press


f1live.com

Javed
20-06-2005, 11:57 PM
Bernie, Max and Jean, sitting in a tree...... ahahahaha

pornstar
21-06-2005, 12:01 AM
See as more and more discussion grows, blame falls squarly on Michelin.

I've heard this a few times in this post, so Ill ask with a helmet on. There was the suggestion that they michelin runners slow down for that corner to save their tyres. They never even looked at this.

Javed
21-06-2005, 12:02 AM
YEs it was looked at, but it was deemed too risky.

pornstar
21-06-2005, 12:12 AM
Thats what i dont get, ppl slow down with mechanical problems, or certain cars with certain packages....

h17am
21-06-2005, 01:08 AM
To those that still thinks that a chicane should have been installed and to those that blamed FIA by not "bending" the rules a little bit:
1. F1 is a sporting contest which has its own rules and regulations. This should not be changed everytime a competitor brings the wrong equipment. Michelin had two wrong tyres in the USGP. Michelin flew over tyres from France and also said that they too were unsafe.
2. So then Michelin wanted a chicane to slow down turns 12-13. This is rejected and FIA offered solutions e.g: speed monitoring through 12-13, pitting in to change tyres (under safety regulations) or going through the pits every lap so not to run turns 12-13. The fact that FIA suggested these solutions kinda shows that the cars are NOT going to blow up if you pit in too often.
3. Michelin did not want to do any of these solutions, so they still wanted the chicane installed. The installed chicane would slow down the Michelin cars through turns 12 and 13... and it would slow down the Bridgestone cars as well.
4. FIA considers this to be grossly unfair to the bridgestone runners and hence rejects the chicane idea.
5. Some issues to be considered regarding the chicane idea:
- With not much time left after the chicane is installed, if it was installed, there won't be any chance for the teams to test and make changes to the cars.
- The changes to the cars needed may include: brake balance, gear ratios, aerodynamics, suspension setting, TYRE CHOICE!!!!, etc, etc, etc.
- The cars are set up for the original Indianapolis with super fast turns 12-13. Putting in a chicane there would mean that the circuit layout is changed, the characteristics is changed (i.e. from a super fast turn 13, to a super slow chicane). This may have an effect on the brakes as they are forced to do more work than what they are designed for (instead of going all out for turn 13, braking is necessary).
- With such a short time to conduct the chicane, it means the construction of the chicane would probably not satisfy the safety requirements and standards. Imagine if an accident occured there.
6. It must also be noted that both Michelin and Bridgestone are given a letter by FIA, addressing the importance of the reliability of the tyres. This basically said that they shouldn't compromise safety over performance. And this is done after the Monaco GP where both Renaults wore down their tyres so much.

So, by wanting the chicane put in, Michelin wants to slow down corners turn 12-13. However this would also slow down all the Bridgestone cars, and not only that, it would have significant effects on all the cars setting and so on. Pity Michelin does not understand this.

^^v
21-06-2005, 01:08 AM
Michelin puts blame on Max Mosley
'We proposed realistic, feasible alternatives'
http://f1.racing-live.com/img/l3.gif
http://f1.racing-live.com/img/vide.gif


http://f1.racing-live.com/photos/imgactu/05/michelin-indianapolis2_180605_220x153.jpg
Who is 'right' in this strange situation?

French tyre-maker Michelin has rejected any blame for advising seven Formula One teams to pull out of Sunday's US Grand Prix because of fears its tyres might be dangerous.

After Ralf Schumacher's high-speed accident in Friday's free practice in Indianapolis left the German driver so shaken he had to withdraw from the race, Michelin admitted it could not guarantee the durability of the tyres supplied for the race.

They pinned hopes on new tyres being flown in from its base at Clermont-Ferrand. But formula one's governing body, the FIA, refused to allow new tyres to be used, or a chicane to be set up to slow the cars. But Michelin's competition deputy director Frederic Henry-Biabaud said Monday they had no option but to withdraw.

"Michelin would have been to blame if it had raced. Do you imagine what would have happened if, having seen the failure on Friday, we had decided to race the tyre and we had a problem," he told Europe 1 radio station. "I prefer, as a company, we find ourselves in this position rather than if there had been an accident."

He blamed the specifics of the Indianapolis track and he hit out at motor racing's governing body, the FIA, for failing to agree to a compromise.


"We proposed realistic, feasible alternatives," he added.

The FIA's stance was seen as a hardening of the battle lines between the body's president, Max Mosley, and the car manufacturers who back the idea of a breakaway championship in the face of Mosley's raft of new regulations to simplify motor racing to be brought in from the start of 2008.

Michelin's failure to supply its teams with safe and durable tyres came less than two weeks after it was warned by the FIA not to sacrifice safety for performance. Mosley wrote to Michelin in the wake of Kimi Raikkonen's suspension failure in the European Grand Prix - caused by vibrations which built up after the Finn flat-spotted his right front tyre - warning it should take no risks in the specifications of its tyres.

Source AFP


f1live.com

^^v
21-06-2005, 01:12 AM
blows exchanged.....

at the end of the day.. its all bout fkn politics.. money n power...



FIA stress need for rules to be followed
After US Grand Prix fiasco
http://f1.racing-live.com/img/l3.gif
http://f1.racing-live.com/img/vide.gif


http://f1.racing-live.com/photos/imgactu/05/fia-imola-wri_220405_220x151.jpg
'Formula One is a sporting contest.
It must operate by clear rules.' - FIA
World motorsport's world governing body, the FIA, on Monday stressed the need for Formula One rules to be adhered to after criticism by French tyre-maker Michelin that FIA were to blame for the US Grand Prix fiasco which has severely dented American interest in the sport.

Only the six cars on Bridgestone tyres took part after a row over additional track safety measures once a practice crash alerted Michelin to the fact they had a problem.

Fans and Indianapolis track officials were fuming after Sunday's farce saw world champion Michael Schumacher claim his first win of the year ahead of Ferrari team-mate Rubens Barichello to give Ferrari 18 championship points which puts them joint second with McLaren.

FIA, stressing the need for rules to be adhered to, said in a statement on Monday: "Formula One is a sporting contest. It must operate by clear rules. These cannot be negotiated each time a competitor brings the wrong equipment to a race.

"At Indianapolis we were told by Michelin that their tyres would be unsafe unless their cars were slowed in the main corner. We understood and among other suggestions offered to help them by monitoring speeds and penalising any excess.


"However the Michelin teams refused to agree unless the Bridgestone runners were slowed by the same amount. They suggested a chicane. The Michelin teams seemed unable to understand that this would have been grossly unfair as well as contrary to the rules. The Bridgestone teams had suitable tyres. They did not need to slow down.

"The Michelin teams' lack of speed through turn 13 would have been a direct result of inferior equipment, as often happens in Formula One."

FIA said the behaviour by tyre-makers Michelin and the teams using their tyres had damaged the sport.

"What about American fans? What about Formula One fans worldwide? Rather than boycott the race, the Michelin teams should have agreed to run at reduced speed in turn 13.

"The rules would have been kept, they would have earned Championship points and the fans would have had a race. As it is, by refusing to run unless the FIA broke the rules and handicapped the Bridgestone runners, they have damaged themselves and the sport."

Earlier, Michelin's competition deputy director Frederic Henry- Biabaud said Monday they had no option but to withdraw. "Michelin would have been to blame if it had raced. Do you imagine what would have happened if, having seen the failure on Friday, we had decided to race the tyre and we had a problem," he told Europe 1 radio station. "I prefer, as a company, we find ourselves in this position rather than if there had been an accident."

He blamed the specifics of the Indianapolis track and he hit out at motor racing's governing body, the FIA, for failing to agree to a compromise. "We proposed realistic, feasible alternatives," he added.

The row is seen in some quarters as a hardening of the battle lines between the body's president, Max Mosley, and the car manufacturers who back the idea of a breakaway championship in the face of Mosley's raft of new regulations to simplify motor racing to be brought in from the start of 2008.

Michelin's failure to supply its teams with safe and durable tyres came less than two weeks after it was warned by the FIA not to sacrifice safety for performance.

Mosley wrote to Michelin in the wake of Kimi Raikkonen's suspension failure in the European Grand Prix - caused by vibrations which built up after the Finn flat-spotted his right front tyre - warning it should take no risks in the specifications of its tyres.

Source AFP

Vivski
21-06-2005, 02:13 AM
Nah, I still say a chicane would have been a good solution. A better solution than a 6 car race which was an alternative... it was the alternative the FIA chose. They had options and they chose that one so they have to be able to back up that decision instead of hiding behind the rulebook.

There are two reasons why a chicane would be a bad idea...
1) Bridgestone are disadvantaged because they have worked hard and Michelin have got it wrong. Bridgestone did nothing wrong and they are being punished?
2) It is unsafe to have drivers tearing toward a brand new corner in race conditions.

Two solutions...
1) Michelin score no points, so Bridgestone are no longer disadvantaged, who cares if the cars aren't perfectly setup, it's better than a 6 car race.
2) Build the chicane overnight (when it was first suggested... not 30mins before), let the drivers drive through it in road cars that morning to get a feel for it, then have 10 sighting laps before starting a 60 lap race.

They would be two solutions which would make it safe and feasible for a good race. Ferrari get their points, Michelin gets to race and the FIA get a warm fuzzy feeling that they've done the right thing for the sport.

There is a way this could have been resolved. They can't just hide behind the rulebook. There needs to be a new rule. If the race is going to be shot to pieces, the FIA must find a fair solution so the fans get to see a good race.


I'm not saying a chicane would have been a perfect solution. I'm not saying it would not have stuffed up the cars' setups. I'm saying it was a much better solution than a 6 car race. It would have showcased F1 as a sport with quick thinking management and a sport which can make anything possible. But to throw your hands up in the air and say there's nothing we can do...


The alternatives offered to the Michelin runners were not acceptible. Running slower, using pit lane, changing tyres. All result in Ferrari lapping the entire field. That's not a spectacle. Even if they're running for points, the whole race would have been a circus if they used any of those solutions. The Michelin runners were better to pack up and head back to France where I'm sure Michelin will be looking to get back to the front infront of their home crowd.


In the end, it doesn't really matter for the season. The deserving drivers and teams got the points. The championship will be back to full tilt in two week. The only real losers are the US fans and the US GP. Really sad that all those people came from far and wide and got to see a poor excuse of a race. I hope they got their money back... any word on that? Did they get their money back?


Hey, if Jean Todt is serious, that if a chicane was put in and Ferrari was given 18 points before the race, he would not have let Michael and Rubens race... that's a strange decision. No points on offer, we don't race. How much does it cost to race once they have everything there already? Everything is set up for a race, it's all paid for... and they would pull their cars? He's full of sh*t. As he said, America is their biggest market. They're not going to pull their cars when the whole race has been paid for and give up a chance to showcase their racing just because there are no points on offer.

Hondavirgin
21-06-2005, 09:14 AM
I don't get it, Michelin's job is to supply tyres to fit the track, not the FIA's job to supply tracks to fit the tyres.

A chicane was ridiculous. However, reading the michelin response up there it seems that the FIA refused to allow them to use new tyres they brought in that would have been safe to use, however Charlie Whiting's letter said they could pit in and change tyres during the race for safety reasons and he would accept this fault was reason enough for this.

So basically, as i understand it, they would have come in after the first lap, changed tyres to the safe michelins, and then gone out again, net result being they lose one pit stop, we get a race. Blame lies with Michelin.

I mean, what if Ferrari came to the spanish gp and then found their brakes weren't up to the task of that big stop at the end. Would you expect the FIA to put a chicane in half way down the straight?

As for whether F1 is a business or a sport, its a business for Bernie, but a sport for everyone else. If business sense prevailed then the chicane would have been put in as what happened on the weekend was business suicide! So clearly the SPORTING side of things was in play, i.e. the rules of the game.

but like i said above, why didn't michelin pit in to change tyres?!!?!?! :confused:

hihidamon
21-06-2005, 10:00 AM
...Michelin should be kicked in the nuts over and over again for not racing when they could have, by either going through the pits every lap to avoid running turn 13, changing the tyres in pitstops which is allowed under safety considerations.
Great idea on going thru pit lane everylap, but at the speed limit of 80kmh, defintely it would have created a traffic jam in the pit lane!

BTW, Changing tyres is allowed only with penalty imposed everytime a tyre is changed, because the Michellin was technically and foundamentally unsafe in the very beginning of the race (not caused by blow-up or incidents), safety considerations would not be granted. If no penalty is to be imposed, everyone is going to come up with qualifying tyres (which last only 20 laps)for qualifying, and then they can change tyres free from penalty, "under safety considerations" during a normal pit stop on lap 20 and 40 or so depending on the race distance - effectively not 1 tyre per race anymore.

Hondavirgin
21-06-2005, 10:40 AM
well, i clearly remember (i'll check the tape tonight maybe) Crompton reading out the ltr from Charlie Whiting to Michelin and their teams before the "race" and it said that he accepted that the tyres were unsafe and would allow teams to change tyres based on safety grounds. So why couldn't they do this? if you want to make sure it doesn't happen again, hit them with like a stop go penalty or drive through.

I think it would have been penalty enough to have to stop, change tyres (ban on putting any fuel in at the same time) and then have a drive through as well, you're looking at probably up to a minute lost right there.

hihidamon
21-06-2005, 10:40 AM
:thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup:
To those that still thinks that a chicane should have been installed and to those that blamed FIA by not "bending" the rules a little bit:
1. F1 is a sporting contest which has its own rules and regulations. This should not be changed everytime a competitor brings the wrong equipment. Michelin had two wrong tyres in the USGP. Michelin flew over tyres from France and also said that they too were unsafe.
2. So then Michelin wanted a chicane to slow down turns 12-13. This is rejected and FIA offered solutions e.g: speed monitoring through 12-13, pitting in to change tyres (under safety regulations) or going through the pits every lap so not to run turns 12-13. The fact that FIA suggested these solutions kinda shows that the cars are NOT going to blow up if you pit in too often.
3. Michelin did not want to do any of these solutions, so they still wanted the chicane installed. The installed chicane would slow down the Michelin cars through turns 12 and 13... and it would slow down the Bridgestone cars as well.
4. FIA considers this to be grossly unfair to the bridgestone runners and hence rejects the chicane idea.
5. Some issues to be considered regarding the chicane idea:
- With not much time left after the chicane is installed, if it was installed, there won't be any chance for the teams to test and make changes to the cars.
- The changes to the cars needed may include: brake balance, gear ratios, aerodynamics, suspension setting, TYRE CHOICE!!!!, etc, etc, etc.
- The cars are set up for the original Indianapolis with super fast turns 12-13. Putting in a chicane there would mean that the circuit layout is changed, the characteristics is changed (i.e. from a super fast turn 13, to a super slow chicane). This may have an effect on the brakes as they are forced to do more work than what they are designed for (instead of going all out for turn 13, braking is necessary).
- With such a short time to conduct the chicane, it means the construction of the chicane would probably not satisfy the safety requirements and standards. Imagine if an accident occured there.
6. It must also be noted that both Michelin and Bridgestone are given a letter by FIA, addressing the importance of the reliability of the tyres. This basically said that they shouldn't compromise safety over performance. And this is done after the Monaco GP where both Renaults wore down their tyres so much.

So, by wanting the chicane put in, Michelin wants to slow down corners turn 12-13. However this would also slow down all the Bridgestone cars, and not only that, it would have significant effects on all the cars setting and so on. Pity Michelin does not understand this.
Cant agree more! :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup:
Michellin has obviously stepped over the limit this year and paid the price in consequence. This saga really gives us the reason why the bridgestones have been "slow" compared to the speedy Michellins.

Zdster
21-06-2005, 11:23 AM
5. Some issues to be considered regarding the chicane idea:
- With not much time left after the chicane is installed, if it was installed, there won't be any chance for the teams to test and make changes to the cars.


I agree with most of what you are saying except this. I think that there was talk of putting in a chicane as early as 24 hours prior to the race. That would have given the teams at least some chance to learn the new configuration.

Vivski
21-06-2005, 02:26 PM
In the end what's done is done and Michelin will be back in France to dominate their home race.

Whoever made the decisions at Michelin has cost them a whole heap of money!! US F1 fans will never buy Michelin again. Although I love Bridgestone tyres, I still would have liked to see a race. And I only got up at 3:30am, I didn't travel 1000km and pay for tickets and accomodation for the entire weekend.

I would not have enjoyed seeing the 14 Michelin shod cars losing 15s every lap from doing 80km/h while the Bridgestone shod cars went 340km/h past them. That's hardly entertaining and mixing pitstops in as well... it's a recipe for disaster.

And for the record, they were allowed to change tyres to the same tyres.... not different tyres. So they would have chewed up 5 sets of tyres each and lost 2mins in pitstops alone, and the teams would have had to gamble on when the tyres were about to let go.

In the end, it was a pretty good outcome for Webber. He was always going to suffer with his under-powered Williams. Sure he doesn't mind dropping the round.
I can't wait for France, to put this all behind us. The sooner it's forgotten the better.

It's been a good discussion though. :p

Hondavirgin
21-06-2005, 03:01 PM
From michelin's response posted above

"They pinned hopes on new tyres being flown in from its base at Clermont-Ferrand. But formula one's governing body, the FIA, refused to allow new tyres to be used, or a chicane to be set up to slow the cars. But Michelin's competition deputy director Frederic Henry-Biabaud said Monday they had no option but to withdraw."

Or do you mean that whiting would allow them to change to a new tyre but the same tyre, rather than to the new safe tyre? if thats the case then the FIA should have allowed the safe tyre, let Bridgestone change tyres too, and change the rules so the penalties are so harsh that no-one can afford to have it ever happen again.

yeah, bring on France, was it last year that a Renault lost third place on the last corner? maybe we should move to a France discussion thread haha.

Vivski
21-06-2005, 03:46 PM
To my knowledge, Whiting said Michelin could fly in new tyres and swap them over but face an undisclosed penalty. The only think we knew about the penalty is that it would not be exclusion. But who knows what they had in mind.

In the end, it seemed too hard for Michelin to get the huge number of tyres to the US in time. And knowing they would face a large penalty, they probably decided it wasn't worth it. Can you imagine how hard it would be to get 14x4x[however many sets each car needs] tyres into a plane and have them ready in Indy the next day?!

So in the end, the solution from FIA was to allow the teams to change tyres for safety reasons to the same tyres they already had (the faulty batch) and just change more frequently. But I assume they would not be allowed to refuel at the same time... is that right?

Once the FIA said no to a chicane and Michelin said they would not guarantee the safety of the driver, there really were no options. As the commentators said... after Michelin saying that, the consequences of an accident causing injury would not bear thinking about! Especially in the US... imagine if a track marshall or spectator was killed in an accident... everyone would be sued.

LUD02C
21-06-2005, 03:59 PM
Why is everyone against Ferrari?
They are saying the FIA and Ferrari are together on this blah blah blah (not all you OzHonda guys, but some people in general and other forums i've read).

Why should Ferrari comprimise for Michelin's failure?
If I was Todt I'd do the samething.
The Michelin runners wouldn't even thought about putting a chicance in if Bridgestones tyre was no good.

So it comes to cause more people Michelin then we have to obey them and put a chicane in?
NO
They stuffed up and they should cop the consequences and changing the tyres after the first lap was the best solution to this.
They recieve a penaulty?
Who cares, they get to race don't they?

I bet if Bridgestones tyre was no good, Ferrari would of just copped the penaulty for changing the tyre on the first lap.

Its funny when you switch it around.

Hondavirgin
21-06-2005, 04:07 PM
Well, if they had the option of racing but incurring a penalty not being exclusion, then they should have done that and the blame ends up resting squarely with michelin, the FIA gave them a realistic option to get out of it.

was funny seeing michelin ads in every ad break though haha

^^v
21-06-2005, 05:31 PM
after all this....
BAR r the only pointless team -_-"

jackosimm
21-06-2005, 05:36 PM
how about everybody move on? I like that idea. Sure enough its something to kick up a fuss about, but seriously, get over it.

7th Gen
21-06-2005, 05:55 PM
how about everybody move on? I like that idea. Sure enough its something to kick up a fuss about, but seriously, get over it.

yeh, heh heh :D

the way this thread is going, it sounds like some people lost money or something on it - i reckon you wouldn't be as pissed as the punters over there

get over it and move on people

Vivski
21-06-2005, 06:19 PM
Ferrari cop it for a multitude of reasons and I'm sure you know most of them Jase.
Some of them are reasonable criticisms, some are unreasonable criticisms and some pure bias.

civ_sik
21-06-2005, 09:01 PM
no body cares, no body cares, so over it, so you all missed having 20 cars on the grid, fuk get over it.

enoch
21-06-2005, 09:42 PM
ferrari did nothing wrong, the only group in the wrong is michellin
they didnt provide correct tyres, they are at fault
why drag ferrari into it?

^^v
22-06-2005, 01:46 AM
http://f1.racing-live.com/img/vide.gif
function openwindow(url,title,options) { window.open(url,title,options); }US deserters in F1 dock
The teams could be forced to pay back the fans
http://f1.racing-live.com/img/l3.gif
http://f1.racing-live.com/img/vide.gif


http://f1.racing-live.com/photos/imgactu/05/ambiance-indianapolis_190605_220x152.jpg
Many unhappy fans at Indy...
All seven Formula One teams who failed to race in Sunday's US Grand Prix over fears their Michelin tyres might be dangerous have been charged with bringing the sport into disrepute.

Toyota, Renault, McLaren-Mercedes, Williams-BMW, BAR-Honda, Sauber-Petronas and Red Bull-Cosworth have been summonsed to defend the charges in Paris on June 29 by motor racing's governing body FIA.

FIA took the decision after the race descended into farce when the seven teams pulled into the pitlane after the warm-up lap leaving just the cars of Ferrari, Minardi and Jordan in the field.

The French tyre maker has refused to accept the blame - instead accusing FIA and their president Max Mosley of refusing to compromise over the problem.

The FIA have charged the team chiefs with:
- failing to ensure they had a supply of suitable tyres
- wrongfully refusing to allow their cars to start the race and/or
- wrongfully refusing to allow their cars to race subject to a speed restriction in one corner which was safe for suich tyres as they had and/or
- combined with other teams to make a demonstration damaging to the image of Formula One by pulling into the pits immediately before the start of the race.

The FIA cannot ban the teams because future races would be wrecked with 14 cars missing but Mosley has already raised the possibility that teams could be forced to pay back the fans who paid 100 dollars a ticket for Sunday's fiasco at Indianapolis.


A refund was estimated to be around 16 million dollars.

The teams may anyway be penalised by their sponsors who invite thousands of corporate guests to races.

BAR Honda were faced with paying back 11 million dollars to sponsors when they were banned from the Monaco Grand Prix this year.

The FIA's stance was seen as a hardening of the battle lines between Mosley, and the car manufacturers who back the idea of a breakaway championship in the face of Mosley's raft of new regulations to simplify motor racing to be brought in from the start of 2008.

Michelin's failure to supply its teams with safe and durable tyres came less than two weeks after it was warned by the FIA not to sacrifice safety for performance.

Mosley wrote to Michelin in the wake of Kimi Raikkonen's suspension failure in the European grand prix - caused by vibrations which built up after the Finn flat-spotted his right front tyre - warning it should take no risks in the specifications of its tyres.

Source AFP


f1live.com

Hondavirgin
22-06-2005, 08:59 AM
yeh, heh heh :D

the way this thread is going, it sounds like some people lost money or something on it - i reckon you wouldn't be as pissed as the punters over there

get over it and move on people

no-one's really angry, its just a discussion about a sport we love, and its a failry major event in that sport.

redliner
22-06-2005, 11:18 AM
bring the law suit in baby

bigteethygrin
22-06-2005, 12:29 PM
In the end a bitter dissapointment for all.. they found what was probably the worst possible solution out of all their options. Michelin and the F1 teams inc ferrari all had their agendas to look at but the hard line of the FIA towards them was unnecessary.. after all its their show and perhaps they could have acted more towrads ensuring a good show happened and worry about the legalities afterwards.

Hondavirgin
22-06-2005, 12:34 PM
bring the law suit in baby

of course there's a law suit, its America, you get sued if you step on someone's toe accidentally haha.

Vivski
22-06-2005, 01:28 PM
of course there's a law suit, its America, you get sued if you step on someone's toe accidentally haha.
Yes, but what were you doing wearing ice-skates while walking in the city?

The Michelin-shod teams could not race. They really had no choice. I don't think they should be forced to pay back the fans. Punishing the teams who want a breakaway championship... is that really a smart thing to do?

Punish Michelin. They brought equipment which wasn't up to the task. Bernie should pay out dollar-for-dollar with Michelin, 'cos his team failed to put on a show. They could have done more. Once Michelin had supplied the wrong tyres, there was really nothing they could do.

Either way the fans deserve their money back.

LUD02C
22-06-2005, 04:51 PM
3 fans have filed a law suit against the FIA in the states last night.
I don't think they know who they are up against.
Being dumb Americans, they probably want $8 million US in compensation.

LUD02C
22-06-2005, 04:56 PM
FIA President Max Mosley has reiterated his belief that the Michelin teams should compensate the Indy fans – and insisted that he won’t resign over the debacle.

Speaking to the BBC, Mosley said: "Between the teams and Michelin, they owe the fans the money.

"Morally, there's no question in my mind, they deprived the fans of something. They owe the fans money and they owe the fans compensation for wasted time."

The question of compensation is likely to loom large at next Wednesday's hearing, in which the seven teams will face charges from the FIA that they brought the sport into disrepute.

Mosley also hit backs at claims he should consider his own position following the farce at Indy when just six cars raced in the U.S. GP.

"If something was my fault I'd be first to consider my position, not because a tyre company can't supply the right tyres or the teams won't compromise by running a little bit more slowly through a fast corner.

"I'd be first to accept blame if it was over something I had control but I don't. If I was in charge of the tyres or the teams, it wouldn't have happened."

"It seems that the Michelin teams failed to bring a back-up tyre as usual with them to Indianapolis. As a result they had a performance problem and asked for the circuit to be changed to overcome their difficulty.

"The FIA offered them options to compete safely within the limitations of their tyres."

Paul Stoddart has already called on Mosley to be ousted from office.

"Max Mosley categorically forbid the introduction of that chicane, and he's going to have some serious questions to answer as to why he actually took that decision," the Minardi boss told the BBC.

"I have heard many, many calls for Mosley’s resignation. I would echo that.

"I don't think there is any credible explanation for what went on. I think the president of the FIA has to have a very close look at his position, because many people think his position is untenable."

LUD02C
22-06-2005, 04:58 PM
Bernie Ecclestone is facing the prospect of being sued for the £7.4m it cost to stage Sunday's Indianapolis farce, according to The Guardian.

As F1's commercial rights holder, Ecclestone would be the first port of call should, as expected, Indianapolis’ organisers turn to the lawyers.

"We're going to analyse our situation, our position here," Joie Chitwood, president and chief operating officer of the track, said in a Q & A released by Indy officials.

"We're probably going to respond appropriately in the coming days. There are a number of questions like that which we will have to sit down and look at and come up with a better response."

"We invested a lot of time and effort in preparing this property for a world-class racing event. We feel as victimised as the fans do in what they witnessed today. We had no control over the ability to stage an event. The people who had the ability to control things today were the FIA, Formula One Management and Michelin. I believe Mr Ecclestone is aware of the position and our unhappiness with what occurred."

Bernie himself sounds prepared for a legal battle.

"If I was a race organiser and I found myself in a position that I had to reimburse the paying customers, then I might well seek to make good my loss from somebody else," he said.

"On the other hand you could take the view that Indianapolis had a round of the formula one world championship and that's it. The Indy organisers are well versed with the unpredictability of this business. IRL and Nascar races can be delayed by a day or so because they don't race in the rain."

Meanwhile, it's claimed that the primary motive of the seven Michelin teams emerging from the pits for the formation lap was to complete their obligations to the race promoter – and thus avoid any legal complications.

LUD02C
22-06-2005, 04:58 PM
The first lawsuit over the Indy farce has been filed in the U.S.

The Indy Star reports that one Larry Bowers, a Colorado resident, has 'filed a class action lawsuit against the Fédération Internationale de l'Automobile (FIA), Formula One Group, Formula One Administration, Michelin Tires and the Indianapolis Motor Speedway following Sunday’s United States Grand Prix.'

Bowers is claiming that the event was fraudulent, and that 'Formula One, the FIA, Michelin, the teams equipped by Michelin and the Indianapolis Motor Speedway forged an agreement allowing the Michelin teams to participate in the formation lap and then exit the track prior to the start of the race.'

'The alleged 'race' participated by just three teams did not constitute a true grand prix race under FIA and Formula One rules in that the race was started with an insufficient number of participants,' the lawsuit declares.

Bowers is seeking reimbursement for the five tickets he bought for the event and 'other costs' he spent as part of his attendance.

Hondavirgin
22-06-2005, 05:23 PM
3 fans have filed a law suit against the FIA in the states last night.
I don't think they know who they are up against.
Being dumb Americans, they probably want $8 million US in compensation.

each haha :D

I don't see how the FIA can be sued, they merely enforced the rules of the sport, Michelin teams and Michelin themselves didn't contract with Indianapolis or the spectators, so the only avenue appears to Indy.

However, most tickets i've seen have some sort of disclaimer on them, so that could save Indy. Then indy will have to go after Bernie. Good luck too, i'm sure his contracts are watertight.

jackosimm
22-06-2005, 07:14 PM
3 fans have filed a law suit against the FIA in the states last night.
I don't think they know who they are up against.
Being dumb Americans, they probably want $8 million US in compensation.


I hear that!

and I must say I love enoch too



ferrari did nothing wrong, the only group in the wrong is michellin
they didnt provide correct tyres, they are at fault
why drag ferrari into it?

^^v
22-06-2005, 07:45 PM
Meanwhile, it's claimed that the primary motive of the seven Michelin teams emerging from the pits for the formation lap was to complete their obligations to the race promoter – and thus avoid any legal complications.


lolz wonder if they'll actually get away with that...

LUD02C
22-06-2005, 08:22 PM
I'm guessing the only reason why they went out on the formation lap was so they didn't get into any legal trouble at all.
Remember they hire guys just to know the rules, so over the weekend and 7 teams would have had a plan and checked every consecquence!

This is going to go on forever I reckon, Michelin blame FIA, FIA blame Michelin, bogans blame Ferrari its a never ending circle.

nEUROtic
22-06-2005, 08:54 PM
They coulda just said they werent racing. 45 minutes before the rules state you need to tell the stewards. They have now all been summoned for not obeying that :S

Vivski
22-06-2005, 09:09 PM
At the moment, everyone's trying to pin the blame on everyone else. If someone ends up in breach of the rules then they are liable and will be taken to court by half the fans.

6 cars isn't a race is it? I thought there was a rule which said if there are less than a certain number of cars then there's no race and Bernie has to cough up the money to reimburse everyone. If they can deflect the blame to the Michelin teams and prove that they broke the rules, then they can get the reimbursement money off the teams.
That's why this circus of blame games is continuing. Any GP other than US and they could move on. But being in the US, this saga is going to go on for months.

Vivski
22-06-2005, 09:12 PM
Bernie's in a tough spot, 'cos if he says that it WAS a race, 'cos all 20 cars fronted up to the dummy grid then he will not be legally liable... but on the other hand, that will mean the 7 Michelin teams did start the race, so they have fulfilled their obligations.

Hondavirgin
23-06-2005, 09:23 AM
I see on F1-Live.com thatpaul stoddart has given his "unbiased" view on what happened at indy. Haha, he's the person least able to give an unbiased opinion, and after what he tried to do to the sport in australia, he's got no credibility at all!

hihidamon
23-06-2005, 09:45 AM
I see on F1-Live.com thatpaul stoddart has given his "unbiased" view on what happened at indy. Haha, he's the person least able to give an unbiased opinion, and after what he tried to do to the sport in australia, he's got no credibility at all!
lol :D and funny thing is he runs bridgestones with his cars... I really dont get it....

Vivski
23-06-2005, 11:18 AM
Stoddart will say anything. He's a tool. But his cause in this case might be right... getting rid of Mosley could be good for motorsport... as long as there's a good replacement.

Hehe, this topic is almost as long as the F1 discussion thread. **chuckles**

Hondavirgin
23-06-2005, 11:21 AM
Hey, when the GPWC comes in (as it hopefully does), then the sports still going to have to run under mosley yeah as the head of the FIA?

LUD02C
23-06-2005, 04:34 PM
I hope the GPWC doesn't come in.
It will turn F1 into Indy vs Champ cars, and now both are boring.

They need Max to go, and put a driver in his position, like Niki Lauder or Jackie Stewart.

Bernie, can be sacked from my knowledge, the banks that own over 70% of F1 can have a decision (like a jury) to boot him out (i think)

Hondavirgin
23-06-2005, 05:10 PM
no way, GPWC will have support of every manufacturer besides GM, Ford and Fiat, and Fiat's the only one who wants to be in F1, they would be forced to race with GPWC or not race at all.

Nyeh, i don't mind what series runs, as long as its as good as the racing has been this year and there's no Bernie.

I think your right too, the banks can boot him out if they REALLY want to, but why? he makes them so much money.

jackosimm
23-06-2005, 05:32 PM
how many teams have signed to the concord agreement, didnt ferrari sign till 2010?

Dylan
23-06-2005, 09:30 PM
There are so many uneducated opinions in here. It's obvious who's at fault here.

As I said in my previous post, it is 100% Michelins fault for bringing the wrong tyre to the event, but it is absoloutely, 100%, the FIA's fault that there were only 6 cars in the race. It's as simple as that.

I am not debating that Michelin was in the wrong, but stating that the situation that resulted where only 6 cars were out on the track during the race could easily have been avoided if the FIA, and Max Mosely in particular, had not been so arrogant and close minded. If this race ends Formula 1's association with the United States, the world as a whole has only one man to blame... Max Mosely.

The Indianapolis track was diamond-grinded before the INDY 500, and Bridgestone had the advantage... they ran under their Firestone branind for the INDY 500 and knew exactly how abrasive the surface was before even arriving at INDY.

Michelin came to the track with no knowledge at all. They would have visited the track, found out some information about the surface, but apart from that, no knowledge.

I respect Peter Winsors comments, and have been reading all his articles in the F1 Racing magazine since mid-1997 (I was 12 years old), and I still have every issue since then on my bookshelf. I believe him that they are unsafe when only used in one particular way, but that is completely obvious, and was pointed out by Michelin on day one. The only way they can get around that corner without causing a failure is to take it outside normal racing conditions.

You have to have been following Formula 1 very closely, especially over the last few years, to see that this is typical of the FIA. This is the way wars start, the complete lack of compromise from either side. It's the way all the World Wars started, and in fact, every war in the history of the human race. Michelin had no abiliy to compromise... they couldn't slow down to a safe speed around turn 13, because, what was a safe speed? They couldn't change their tyres, because thats against the rules and they may be found cheating and banned like BAR.

The FIA had all the cards that would have enabled the United States to see a full car grid, but they chose not to play them? why? only Max Mosely knows. All they had to do was build a chicane, put all the Michelin teams to the back of the grid, all the Bridgestone teams to the front, make it so that Michelin teams couldn't score a point, and start the race from behind the safety car for the first say, 5 laps to let the drivers get used to the chicane.

The drivers aren't babys, they don't need us to hold their hands, they are professionals. Also, this situation is not without precedent, after Ayrton Senna's death in 1994, they put a temporary chicane on the main straight at the Spanish Grand Prix, and also at the bottom of Eau Rouge in Belgium before they realised the cause of his death. What was different about this situation?

Don't forget, 9 of the 10 teams, Bernie Ecclestone, Tony George all agreed on Sunday Morning to put the chicane in... they only had one person to call and there would have been a full car grid... Max Mosely, and what did he say? NO. Blame noone else apart from Max.

I have alot more that I can add to this topic, and will be glad to if anyone is interested, but if you are still not convinced, try downloading/listening to Paul Stoddarts Dutch TV interview (http://rapidshare.de/files/2491345/Stoddart_Interview.mp3.html)... that will convince you for sure, unless you are just as close minded as Max Mosely.

Dylan
23-06-2005, 09:31 PM
A letter from Paul Stoddart

Much has been said about the farce that occurred on Sunday, June 19, in Indianapolis, and I feel that in the interests of transparency, it would be worthwhile for someone who was actually present, and participated in the discussions leading up to the start of the Grand Prix, to provide a truthful account of what took place, both for the 100,000-plus fans who were present, and for the hundreds of millions of people watching on television around the world.

While this is a genuine attempt to provide a factual timeline of the relevant events that took place, should any minor detail or sequence be disputed, it will not, in my opinion, affect in any way this account of events that led up to arguably the most damaging spectacle in the recent history of Formula One.

Background

For those who have not followed the recent political developments in Formula One, it is fair to say that, for over a year now, the majority of teams have felt at odds with the actions of the FIA and its President, Max Mosley, concerning the regulations, and the way in which those regulations have been introduced, or are proposed to be introduced. Not a weekend has gone by where some, or all, of the teams are not discussing or disputing these regulations. This is so much the case that it is common knowledge the manufacturers have proposed their own series commencing January 1, 2008, and this is supported by at least two of the independent teams. The general perception is that, in many instances, these issues have become personal, and it is my opinion that was a serious contributory factor to the failure to find a solution that would have allowed all 20 cars to compete in Sunday's United States Grand Prix.

The Facts

Friday, June 17

I noticed that Ricardo Zonta's Toyota had stopped, but in all honesty, did not pay any attention to the reasons why; however, I actually witnessed Ralf Schumacher's accident, both on the monitors, and more significantly, I could see what took place from my position on the pit wall. This necessitated a red flag, and in the numerous replays on the monitors, it looked very much like the cause of the accident was a punctured rear tyre.

Throughout the afternoon, numerous people in the paddock suggested it was a tyre failure and commented that it was similar to the serious accident which befell Ralf Schumacher during the 2004 US Grand Prix. Later that evening was the first time I was aware of a potential problem with the Michelin tyres at this event. In all honesty, I didn't pay a great deal of attention, as our team is on Bridgestone tyres.

Saturday, June 18

On arriving at the circuit, the word throughout the paddock was that there was a potential problem with the rear tyres supplied to all Michelin teams for this event, and it became evident as the first and second sessions were run that most of the affected teams were being very conservative with the amount of on-track running they were doing. In addition, Toyota announced that it had substituted Ricardo Zonta for Ralf Schumacher, who would take no further part in the event. Speculation was rife in the paddock that some Michelin teams might not take part in qualifying. Also, during the practice session, I was informed there would be a Team Principals' meeting with Bernie Ecclestone at 1430 hrs after qualifying, which I incorrectly assumed would centre around the Michelin issue.

Qualifying took place, and indeed, all 20 cars qualified for Sunday's Grand Prix.

At approximately 1420 hrs, I attended Bernie's office, and with representatives present from all other teams, including Ferrari, the meeting commenced. Surprisingly, the main topic of conversation was the number of events and calendar for 2006, followed by a suggestion that a meeting be convened at the next Grand Prix to discuss two issues only – firstly, a proposal for a single-tyre supplier in Formula One, and secondly, whether or not it would be desirable to qualify with or without a race fuel load in 2006. Only at the very end of the meeting did the Michelin tyre issue arise, and in fairness, it was not discussed in any great detail. I personally found this strange, but as I have stated, it did not affect Minardi directly, and therefore I had no reason to pursue the matter.

Throughout Saturday evening, there was considerable speculation in the paddock that the tyre issue was much more serious than at first thought, and people were talking about a fresh shipment of tyres being flown overnight from France, and what penalty the Michelin teams would take should those tyres be used. By the time I left the paddock, people were taking bets on Minardi and Jordan scoring points!

Later that evening, I checked with our Sporting Director on what developments had occurred, and was told that the issue was indeed very serious, and the possibility existed that the Michelin teams would not take part in the race.

Sunday, June 19

I arrived at the circuit at 0815 hrs, only to find the paddock was buzzing with stories suggesting the Michelin teams would be unable to take part in the Grand Prix. I was then handed a copy of correspondence between Michelin, the FIA, and the Michelin teams that revealed the true extent of the problem. By now, journalists were asking if Minardi would agree to a variation of the regulations to allow the Michelin teams to compete, and what penalties I felt would be appropriate.

A planned Minardi press briefing took place at 0930 hrs, and as it was ending, I was summoned to an urgent meeting, along with Jordan, with Bernie Ecclestone, the two most senior Michelin representatives present at the circuit, IMS President Tony George, Team Principals, and technical representatives from the Michelin teams. At this meeting, Michelin, to its credit, admitted that the tyres available were unable to complete a race distance around the Indianapolis circuit without a change to the track configuration, so as to reduce the speed coming out of the last turn onto the banking. Much background information was provided as to the enormous efforts that Michelin, with support from its teams, had undertaken in the preceding 48 hours to try and resolve the problem, but it was clear that all those efforts had failed to produce a suitable solution that wouldn't involve support from the non-Michelin teams, and ultimately, the FIA.

What was requested of the Bridgestone teams was to allow a chicane to be constructed at Turn 13, which would then allow Michelin to advise their teams that, in their opinion, the tyres would be able to complete the race distance. It was made very clear that this was the only viable option available, as previous suggestions from the FIA, such as speed-limiting the Michelin cars through Turn 13, could, and probably would, give rise to a monumental accident. This idea, as well as one concerning the possibility of pit stops every 10 laps, were dismissed, and discussion returned to the only sensible solution – a chicane. During this discussion, a technical representative with specific knowledge of the Indianapolis circuit, together with representatives from IMS, were tasked with preparing the design of a chicane, and Bernie Ecclestone agreed to speak with the one Team Principal not present, Mr Todt, and to inform the FIA President, Max Mosley, who was not present at Indianapolis, of the planned solution to allow the successful running of the US Grand Prix. With only a few hours now remaining to the start of the race, we agreed to reconvene as soon as Bernie had responses from Messrs Todt and Mosley.

(continued in next post)

Dylan
23-06-2005, 09:32 PM
At approximately 1055 hrs, Bernie informed us that not only would Mr Todt not agree, stating that it was not a Ferrari problem, but an FIA and a Michelin problem, but also Mr Mosley had stated that if any attempts were made to alter the circuit, he would cancel the Grand Prix forthwith. These words had a familiar tone to me, as they were similar to those I had heard around midnight on the Friday preceding the 2005 Australian Grand Prix, when I was told by all the senior FIA representatives present that the Australian Grand Prix would be cancelled forthwith if I did not withdraw pending legal action between Minardi and the FIA. Once again, Mr Mosley was not present at that Grand Prix! It is fair to say at this point that the vast majority of people present in the room both felt and stated that Mr Mosley had completely overstepped the mark, had no idea whatsoever of the gravity of the situation, and furthermore, cared even less about the US Grand Prix, its organisers, the fans, and indeed, the hundreds of millions of television viewers around the world who were going to be affected by his intransigence.

By this time, the nine teams had discussed running a non-championship race, or a race in which the Michelin teams could not score points, and even a race whereby only the Michelin teams used the new chicane, and indeed, every other possible option that would allow 20 cars to participate and put on a show, thereby not causing the enormous damage to Formula One that all those present knew would otherwise occur.

By now, most present felt the only option was to install the chicane and race, if necessary, without Ferrari, but with 18 cars, in what would undoubtedly be a non-championship race. We discussed with Bernie the effects of the FIA withdrawing its staff, and agreed among ourselves a Race Director, a Safety Car driver, and other essential positions, and all agreed that, under the circumstances, what was of paramount importance was that the race must go ahead. All further agreed that since we would most likely be denied FIA facilities, such as scales and post-race scrutineering, every competitor would instruct his team and drivers to conduct themselves in the spirit of providing an entertaining race for the good of Formula One.

At this point, we called for all 20 drivers, and indeed, all 20 arrived, at which point we informed them of our plan. While I cannot testify that each and every driver agreed with what we were proposing, what I can say with certainty is that no driver disagreed, and indeed, members of the Grand Prix Drivers' Association discussed overseeing the construction of a suitable chicane. Jean Todt was the only significant team individual not present, and the Ferrari drivers stated this decision was up to Mr Todt.

I feel it is important to stress that, at this stage, and mindful of the total impossibility – call it force majeure if you wish – of 14 cars being able to compete in the race, the nine teams represented agreed they would not take part in the race unless a solution was found in the interests of Formula One as a global sport, as it was clear to all present that the sport, and not the politics, had to prevail if we were to avoid an impending disaster.

After a short break, we reconvened without the drivers. When I arrived in Bernie's office, Flavio Briatore was on the telephone to Mr Mosley, and it was quite clear from the body language of the others gathered in the room that Mr Mosley was having none of our suggestions. At the conclusion of the telephone call, it was obvious that many of those in the room had lost all faith in Mr Mosley and his ability to perform his function as President of the FIA in respect of Formula One matters.

I'm sure this sentence will be treated with contempt by Mr Mosley, but what must be realised is that there are various reasons that other Team Principals, and the most senior people in Formula One, will not say publicly what they openly feel privately about Mr Mosley, his politics and his governance of the sport. There is a great temptation to go into those reasons in detail, but that is for another day. Suffice to say, those gathered at Indianapolis felt Mr Mosley, and to a lesser degree, the lack of co-operation from Mr Todt, were about to be responsible for the greatest FIAsco in Formula One's recent history.

Discussions then took place concerning the other telephone calls with Mr Mosley from, among others, Bernie Ecclestone, Ron Dennis and Tony George, and it was clearly revealed to what extent Mr Mosley was prepared to go in order to achieve his aims. To my total disgust, it was stated that Mosley had informed Mr Martin, the FIA's most senior representative in the USA, that if any kind of non-championship race was run, or any alteration made to the circuit, the US Grand Prix, and indeed, all FIA-regulated motorsport in the US, would be under threat – again, exactly the same tactic that was used in threatening the Australian Grand Prix and Australian motorsport in March of this year.

By now, it was evident Mosley had bullied the US Grand Prix promoter into submission, Bernie Ecclestone was powerless to intervene, and all efforts of the Team Principals, with the exception of Jean Todt, had failed to save the 2005 US Grand Prix.

At this point, the pit lane had opened and a hasty discussion took place concerning whether or not the Michelin teams would go to the grid. A radio had been delivered to me by team personnel at this stage, and I was able to know which cars were going to the grid. It is interesting to note that the Jordan Team Principal was not present at this time, and indeed, it was the Jordans that first proceeded to the grid, followed by the Ferraris. After discussion with Bernie Ecclestone, it was agreed the Michelin teams would go to the grid, but were absolutely prevented from participating in the race because of the tyre situation.

We then proceeded to the grid, at which point I asked Jordan's Colin Kolles if he intended to stand by the other teams or participate in the race. In no uncertain terms, I was told Jordan would be racing. I was also approached by a Bridgestone representative, who informed me that Bridgestone wished us to race. This left me with one of the most difficult decisions I have had to take during my time in F1, as I did not want to race, but given my current relationship with Mr Mosley, felt certain heavy sanctions would follow if I did not. I made it clear to Bernie Ecclestone, and several Team Principals, that if the Jordans either went off or retired, I would withdraw the Minardi cars from the race.

It is important for people to realise that Minardi, the seven Michelin teams, Bernie Ecclestone, and the promoters did not agree with Mr Mosley's tactics. For the reasons previously outlined, it may take some considerable time, if ever, for this to be admitted, but there is no question in my mind that the farce that occurred on Sunday, June 19, 2005 at Indianapolis was the responsibility of the FIA President, Max Mosley, and compounded by the lack of support from Jean Todt.

For the avoidance of doubt, in my opinion, Michelin was responsible enough to admit that the problem was of their creation. When one considers that even the replacement, Barcelona-specification tyres that were shipped to IMS, when tested, apparently exhibited the same characteristics as those that originally failed, this clearly is a case of force majeure, as I do not for a moment believe that Michelin intentionally brought tyres to the event that were unsuitable for competition.

Far more importantly, however, Mosley refused to accept any of the solutions offered, and that refusal was, I believe, politically motivated. Therefore, I feel he failed in his duty, and that is why I have called for his resignation.

Much discussion and debate will undoubtedly take place over the coming weeks and months, but I believe this is a truthful and honest account of the facts, and not the fiction, surrounding the responsibility for this FIAsco. People can now make up their own minds!

;)

Javed
23-06-2005, 09:48 PM
Yeah I read that too, he is right about Mosley though, that guys a toss.

^^v
23-06-2005, 09:50 PM
ahahahah .. one thing i like bout Stoddart..
not afraid to speak his mind... or swear :rolleyes:

Hondavirgin
24-06-2005, 09:20 AM
damn it, i had a huge rant typed and them my internet crashed!!!!!!!!!!

Listening to stoddart and thinking he is fair and unbiased is like watching Today Tonight and thinking it is fair and unbiased reporting.

Everyone complains when F1 is run like a business, then when it is run like a sport and rules enforced some ppl complain that they didn't get a show. Its a sport not a circus show.

Hondavirgin
24-06-2005, 10:08 AM
Double post i know, but i thought this was a good balancer to Stoddart's rant.

I think this comment says it all:

Should you not have just forgotten about the rules and put on a show for the fans?
"You cannot do that if you wish to remain a sport. Formula One is a sport which entertains. It is not entertainment disguised as sport.



Q&A with Max Mosley
FIA President gives his view of the US GP
http://f1.racing-live.com/img/l3.gif
http://f1.racing-live.com/img/vide.gif


http://f1.racing-live.com/photos/imgactu/05/start-indianapolis_190605_220x152.jpg
The moment the US GP descended into farce
What follows is a press release from the FIA in which Max Mosley answers questions on the events on the US Grand Prix, during before and after...

What about the American fans who travelled long distances and spent a lot of money to see a race with only six cars?
"My personal view, and it is only my personal view, is that Michelin should offer to compensate the fans on a fair basis and ask the Indianapolis Motor Speedway to coordinate this. Then Tony George and Bernie Ecclestone should jointly announce that the US Grand Prix will take place at Indianapolis in 2006 and that anyone who had a ticket this year would be entitled to the same ticket free-of-charge next year. But I emphasise, that’s just my personal view."


Should you not have just forgotten about the rules and put on a show for the fans?
"You cannot do that if you wish to remain a sport. Formula One is a sport which entertains. It is not entertainment disguised as sport. But even more importantly Formula One is a dangerous activity and it would be most unwise to make fundamental changes to a circuit without following tried and tested procedures. What happened was bad, but it can be put right. This is not true of a fatality."

Why did you refuse the request of some of the teams to install a chicane?
"The decision was taken (quite rightly in my view) by the FIA officials on the spot and notified to the teams on the Saturday evening. I did not learn about it until Sunday morning European time. They refused the chicane because it would have been unfair, against the rules and potentially dangerous."

Why unfair?
"Because modern Formula One cars are specially prepared for each circuit. To change radically a circuit like Indianapolis, which has very particular characteristics, would be a big disadvantage to the teams which had brought correct equipment to the event."

Is this why Ferrari objected?
"No, Ferrari had nothing whatever to do with the decision. They were never consulted. Ferrari, Jordan and Minardi, as the Bridgestone teams, were not involved."

Why would a chicane have been unfair, it would have been the same for everyone?
"No. The best analogy I can give is a downhill ski race. Suppose half the competitors at a downhill race arrive with short slalom skis instead of long downhill skis and tell the organiser to change the course because it would be dangerous to attempt the downhill with their short skis. They would be told to ski down more slowly. To make the competitors with the correct skis run a completely different course to suit those with the wrong skis would be contrary to basic sporting fairness."

Never mind about ski-ing, what about Formula One?
"Okay, but it’s the same from a purely motor racing point of view. Suppose some time in the future we have five teams with engines from major car companies and seven independent teams with engines from a commercial engine builder (as in the past). Imagine the seven independent teams all have an oil surge problem in Turn 13 due to a basic design fault in their engines. They would simply be told to drop their revs or slow down. There would be no question of a chicane."

All right, but why against the rules, surely you can change a circuit for safety reasons?
"There was no safety issue with the circuit. The problem was some teams had brought the wrong tyres. It would be like making all the athletes in a 100m sprint run barefoot because some had forgotten their shoes."


http://f1.racing-live.com/photos/imgactu/05/dupasquier-indianapolis_190605_220x155.jpg
Meeting after meeting came up with nothing...
How can you say a chicane would be “potentially dangerous” when most of the teams wanted it for safety reasons?
"A chicane would completely change the nature of the circuit. It would involve an extra session of very heavy braking on each lap, for which the cars had not been prepared. The circuit would also not have been inspected and homologated with all the simulations and calculations which modern procedures require. Suppose there had been a fatal accident – how could we have justified such a breach of our fundamental safety procedures to an American court?"

But it’s what the teams wanted.
"It’s what some of the teams wanted because they thought it might suit their tyres. They wanted it because they knew they could not run at full speed on the proper circuit. We cannot break our own rules just because some of the teams want us to."

Why did the FIA stop the teams using a different tyre flown in specially from France?
"It is completely untrue that we stopped them. We told them they could use the tyre, but that the stewards would undoubtedly penalise them to ensure they gained no advantage from breaking the rules by using a high-performance short-life tyre just for qualifying. We also had to make sure this did not set a precedent. However the question became academic, because Michelin apparently withdrew the tyre after trying it on a test rig."

Michelin were allowed to bring two types of tyre – why did they not have a back-up available?
"You would have to ask Michelin. Tyre companies usually bring an on- the-limit race tyre and a more conservative back-up which, although slower, is there to provide a safety net if there are problems."

Is it true that you wrote to both tyre companies asking them to make sure their tyres were safe?
"Yes, we wrote on 1 June and both replied positively. The letter was prompted by incidents in various races in addition to rumours of problems in private testing."

So, having refused to install a chicane, what did the FIA suggest the Michelin teams should do?
"We offered them three possibilities. First, to use the type of tyre they qualified on but with the option to change the troublesome left rear whenever necessary. Tyre changes are allowed under current rules provided they are for genuine safety reasons, which would clearly have been the case here. Secondly, to use a different tyre – but this became academic when Michelin withdrew it as already explained. Thirdly, to run at reduced speed through Turn 13, as Michelin had requested."

How can you expect a racing driver to run at reduced speed through a corner?
"They do it all the time and that is exactly what Michelin requested. If they have a puncture they reduce their speed until they can change a wheel; if they have a brake problem they adjust their driving to overcome it. They also adjust their speed and driving technique to preserve tyres and brakes when their fuel load is heavy. Choosing the correct speed is a fundamental skill for a racing driver."

But that would have been unfair, surely some would have gone through the corner faster than others?
"No, Michelin wanted their cars slowed in Turn 13. They could have given their teams a maximum speed. We offered to set up a speed trap and show a black and orange flag to any Michelin driver exceeding the speed limit. He would then have had to call in the pits – effectively a drive-through penalty."

How would a driver know what speed he was doing?
"His team would tell him before the race the maximum revs he could run in a given gear in Turn 13. Some might even have been able to give their driver an automatic speed limiter like they use in the pit lane."

But would this be real racing?
"It would make no difference to the race between the Michelin cars. Obviously the Bridgestone cars would have had an advantage, but this would have been as a direct result of having the correct tyres for the circuit on which everyone had previously agreed to race."

Did the Michelin teams have any other way of running the race if the circuit itself was unchanged?
"Yes, they could have used the pit lane on each lap. The pit lane is part of the circuit. This would have avoided Turn 13 altogether. It is difficult to understand why none of them did this, because 7th and 8th places were certainly available, plus others if any of the six Bridgestone runners did not finish. There were points available which might change the outcome of the World Championship."

But that would have looked very strange – could you call that a race?
"It would seem strange, but it would absolutely have been a race for the 14 cars concerned. And they would all have been at full speed for most of each lap. That would have been a show for the fans, certainly infinitely better than what happened."

Did not Michelin tell them quite simply not to race at all?
"No. Michelin said speed must be reduced in Turn 13. They were apparently not worried about the rest of the circuit and certainly not about the pit lane, where a speed limit applies. If the instruction had been not to race at all, there would have been no point in asking for a chicane."

Didn’t the Michelin teams offer to run for no points?
"I believe so, but why should the Bridgestone teams suddenly find they had gone all the way to America to run in a non-Championship race? It would be like saying there could be no medals in the Olympic rowing because some countries had brought the wrong boats."

What about running the race with the chicane but with points only for the Bridgestone teams?
"This would start to enter the world of the circus, but even then the race would have been open to the same criticisms on grounds of fairness and safety as a Championship race run with a chicane. It would have been unfair on Bridgestone teams to finish behind Michelin teams on a circuit which had been specially adapted to suit the Michelin low-speed tyres to the detriment of Bridgestone’s high- speed tyres, and the circuit would no longer have met the rules."

Have you ordered Michelin to produce details of all recent tyre failures as reported on a website?
"We cannot order Michelin to do anything. We have no contractual relationship with them. Their relationship is with the teams. However, we have an excellent understanding with both tyre companies and with many of the teams’ other suppliers. We find they always help us with technical information when we ask them."

Wouldn’t Formula One be better if one body were responsible for the commercial side as well as the sport?
"No, this is precisely what the competition law authorities in many parts of the world seek to avoid. It is not acceptable to them that the international governing body should have the right both to sanction and to promote. This would potentially enable it to further its own financial interests to the detriment of competitors and organisers. Apart from the legal aspect there would be an obvious and very undesirable conflict of interest if a body charged with administering a dangerous sport had to consider the financial consequences of a decision taken for safety reasons.. You can be responsible for the sport or for the money, but not both."


http://f1.racing-live.com/photos/imgactu/05/michelin-indianapolis_190605_220x152.jpg
A US Grand Prix F1 would like to forget
Didn’t this entire problem arise because new regulations require one set of tyres to last for qualifying and the race?
"No. The tyre companies have no difficulty making tyres last. The difficult bit is making a fast tyre last. There is always a compromise between speed and reliability. There have been one or two cases this season of too much speed and not enough reliability. Indianapolis was the most recent and worst example."

Finally, what’s going to happen on June 29 in Paris?
"We will listen carefully to what the teams have to say. There are two sides to every story and the seven teams must have a full opportunity to tell theirs. The atmosphere will be calm and polite. The World Motor Sport Council members come from all over the world and will undoubtedly take a decision that is fair and balanced."

E.A.
Source FIA

nEUROtic
24-06-2005, 10:35 AM
Stoddarts Rant is so much more credible. Mosely blatantly denies that "Minardi, Jordan, OR Ferrari were involved". Funny stoddart seems to know so much, and was present in all meetings.

Also Mosely says that it was the FIA stewards that made the decision of no chicane, and Saturday night the teams were informed. Stoddart moves it more towards Sunday, and Mosely being the ultimate decision maker.

I found it funny that bernie seemed to be on their side in Stoddarts report, Considering how well those two get along.

But yeah, Mosely is full of shit

Hondavirgin
24-06-2005, 12:08 PM
Stoddarts Rant is so much more credible. Mosely blatantly denies that "Minardi, Jordan, OR Ferrari were involved". Funny stoddart seems to know so much, and was present in all meetings.

Also Mosely says that it was the FIA stewards that made the decision of no chicane, and Saturday night the teams were informed. Stoddart moves it more towards Sunday, and Mosely being the ultimate decision maker.

I found it funny that bernie seemed to be on their side in Stoddarts report, Considering how well those two get along.

But yeah, Mosely is full of shit

because Stoddart doesn't have an axe to grind with Mosely and the FIA? :rolleyes: He's already well and truly shown he has a blatant disregard for the rules of the sport with his australian antics. If it was Frank Williams, Ron Dennis, Briatore, hell, anyone else i'd give it cred.

Regardless of all the other nonsense, that quote i highlighted is still 100% true, its sport that entertains, not entertainment dressed as sport (if we wanted that i'd watch WWF).

Dylan
24-06-2005, 01:57 PM
because Stoddart doesn't have an axe to grind with Mosely and the FIA? :rolleyes: He's already well and truly shown he has a blatant disregard for the rules of the sport with his australian antics. If it was Frank Williams, Ron Dennis, Briatore, hell, anyone else i'd give it cred.

Regardless of all the other nonsense, that quote i highlighted is still 100% true, its sport that entertains, not entertainment dressed as sport (if we wanted that i'd watch WWF).

And Max Mosely dosen't have an axe to grind with the group of nine? (which all apart from Jordan were affected in a negative way).

You may want to know that, although it appears that the Max Mosely thing is an "interview", it really isn't. The questions were specificaly chosen by Max and answers, therefore he could avoid any tough questions. Also, why does he keep making reference to other sports. Mabey he should focus more on Formula 1, which is entirely different from most other sports.

It appears that some people just can't see past the lies of Max Mosely.

Here is a TOTALLY unbiased opinion from Formula 1 Paysite www.autosport-atlas.com (by the way i havent read it all yet so i dont know if it confirms my view - that FIA were in the wrong, or if it says that the FIA were in the right... I will read it when I get home from work)


When Ralf Schumacher hit the wall on Friday at the Indianapolis Motor Speedway, none of the journalists there realised quite what the implications would be, even when it emerged that his teammate Ricardo Zonta had also suffered a left rear failure. I can remember us all getting excited after the first session in Bahrain last year, when there was a series of spectacular punctures on Michelin cars - all raced back to a dodgy kerb, which was subsequently sorted.

Last weekend, the problem seemed slow to gather momentum. Only gradually did we learn that teams other than Toyota had suffered signs of imminent problems with the heavily loaded left rear. What was worrying was that they seemed to involve third cars that had run a lot of laps.

Saturday June 18th

Early on Saturday morning it become apparent that a crisis was looming. The technical directors of the Michelin teams held a summit meeting with the company, and it was decided that in practice teams should run no more than 10 laps on their new sets. I concluded that this was done in part to ensure that, in addition to the new set for qualifying and the race, there was a low mileage back up set on hand should it be required on Sunday.

There also a mandate from Michelin that pressures be run above a certain limit. It was revealed early on that Toyota had been running pressures very low. Indeed, Zonta had been the first man to run a flying lap on Friday, and when he did so it was very apparent that the car was virtually dragging along the ground as it kicked up the dust round the banking. Higher pressures have always been inherently safer, but there's a price to pay in terms of handling.

The other story that began to gather momentum after the meeting concerned the 'Barcelona' tyres. Michelin had only brought two types of tyre to Indy, something that had happened at only one other race this year. At most events there might be up to four or five options chosen by its teams in the weeks before the race. But this time there were only two, and worryingly both types had been implicated. They shared a common construction, and there was clearly no fallback position.

That's when Michelin decided that it was worth calling Clermont-Ferrand and asking for a third type of tyre to be shipped over, pronto, as an emergency measure. The company described these as Barcelona tyres, different in compound (and date of manufacture) to the tyres already in the States, but identical in construction.

These were scheduled to arrive on Sunday, but there was a small problem. There was absolutely nothing in the rules that allowed them to be introduced so late in the weekend. Regulations being challenged included a change to the type of tyres declared and marked up at the start of the weekend, a change on the type chosen for Saturday/Sunday, a change from qualifying to the race, and the use of tyres outside the main allocation of four sets. It was decided to get the tyres on a plane at all costs, and then sort out the detail later.

Nick Shorrock, Director of Michelin F1 Activities; briefs the press Saturday morningSo on Saturday morning, the paying punters got short shrift as the Michelin runners did very few laps in practice, and that included lots of ins and outs and careful checking. It was also obvious that some cars, notably the Williams and Red Bull, really didn't like running the high pressures. Some wondered aloud whether all teams really did stick to the mandated pressures, at least for one-lap qualifying.

A further side issue emerged as a result of this focus. It's been very noticeable this year how pressures drop under a safety car period. Usually that manifests itself in dodgy handling for a couple of laps, but here there were serious concerns that in there could be a failure in the immediate aftermath of a safety car. The Michelin group concluded that a good solution would be to have three laps of 'virtual' safety car, at much higher speeds than those attainable behind a Mercedes, to allow drivers to get their tyres up to pressure. Again, there was nothing in the rules to enable this to happen.
Continued next post

Dylan
24-06-2005, 01:58 PM
So already on Saturday morning two major stories were emerging that involved changing or waiving regulations. I wondered how that might work out, so I asked the oracle on these matters.

"The procedure is that ten teams are going to have to agree something," said Minardi's Paul Stoddart. "In the interests of safety I will agree, and let's just say that Jordan and [Ferrari's Jean] Todt agree, the other two Bridgestone runners, you're going to then have [FIA president] Max [Mosley]'s agreement, you're going to have to then have Bernie [Ecclestone]'s agreement, so the 12 Concorde signatories are going to have to agree. Then Max has to request, I believe is the right word, the stewards to go along with it.

"The last time such a request was made people will remember was in Melbourne, when I had 10 signatures, and the stewards turned down such a request. They were sympathetic to it, but it was outside the regulations. This is clearly outside the regulations, so it will be interesting to see what happens.

"I have the greatest sympathy for Michelin, it's a great company, and I have great empathy with the teams that are affected by it. But there's no clear-cut way out of this. Whatever happens, the events that take place in the next few hours here, or perhaps even as much as the next 24 hours, are going to have far reaching ramifications. If something is rushed through because of circumstances, I can't see that not having wider ramifications down the track."

Love him or loath him, the bloke is pretty switched on. And he set me thinking. I could already see that this could all come down to the opinion of one man, someone who is not known to like being backed into a corner. And it wasn't Max Mosley.

Paul StoddartBy chance I bumped into Jean Todt as he went into the Ferrari garage. What did he think of the safety car idea, I wondered?

"I don't talk to Michelin, I only talk to Bridgestone," he grinned. It was was pretty clear that there would be no room for manoeuvre.

There were no obvious Michelin failures during Saturday, and only later did it emerge that, on closer inspection, problems were again developing with some low mileage tyres. Investigations continued at the track, and also elsewhere.

Some of the Friday tyres, damaged and otherwise, had gone to a Michelin facility in South Carolina, for detailed examination. It was vital that Michelin could replicate the failure. The US facility had two test rigs, but neither combined high speed running with the loadings experienced at Indy, so tests were inconclusive.

Things moved quickly on Saturday afternoon. At a routine meeting of the team principals, the question of the 'virtual' safety car was brought up, and Todt made it clear that he would not allow any changes to normal procedures. Jordan's Colin Kolles later told me that he was amazed that there was no wider discussion of the tyre issue, and Stoddart repeated that sentiment in a press statement released on Wednesday.

Through the day, the main focus was on the substitution of the Barcelona tyre. At his regular afternoon press gathering, Ron Dennis said that it would be a sensible solution, and that he'd be prepared to allow the six Bridgestone cars start at the front. Somehow that didn't seem like the sort of compromise that would interest Mr. Todt.

In public there still seemed to be some optimism in the Michelin camp that its investigations would pinpoint a problem - perhaps with a specific batch of the Indy tyres - and that there would be some answers. Pierre Dupasquier said he expected news by 2:00am.

It wasn't reported at the time, but in addition to the work going on in South Carolina, Michelin sent some of the Saturday tyres to a much closer facility in Akron, Ohio. They travelled in style in McLaren's private jet, with the FIA technical delegate, Jo Bauer, chaperoning them in a second plane loaned by Ron Dennis. After all, those used in qualifying were in effect subject to parc ferme rules.

But even while all this work was going on, the goalposts had moved. Late afternoon discussions, and a meeting in the Michelin office, led to a dramatic conclusion. At around 7:00pm I wandered down to the paddock to see if there was any news. These days the place empties quickly on Saturday. Because of parc ferme, the mechanics have nothing to do, and at tracks with a bustling city nearby, there's little reason to stay - usually the only folk left behind are technical directors and race engineers, who are plotting strategy.

So the Indy paddock was indeed eerily quiet, just a few folk sitting at tables here and there, and all of them top management. An approach to a technical director of a Michelin team left me speechless.

Ron Dennis"They're now saying we're only going to race with a chicane," he said. So what about the much-vaunted Barcelona tyres, which were supposed to resolve the situation?

"We can't use those. We don't know anything about them and they have the same construction anyway."

I couldn't believe my ears. A few brief strictly off-the-record chats with team bosses, made easier because I was the only member of the press around, confirmed the story. It really was true, and what worried me most was the air of resignation that everyone shared. They knew that this was serious stuff.

The team bosses were preparing a letter to be delivered to the FIA. When I saw a solemn Ron Dennis marching across the paddock from the Michelin office, speaking on his GSM and clutching a piece of paper, I knew what it was. I also knew it wouldn't be a good time to ask any questions.

The only note of optimism was that most seemed convinced that the chicane would eventually happen. Firstly Bernie Ecclestone wanted it, and secondly it simply had to be there if we were going to have a race. Things always work out in the end, don't they?

I wasn't so sure. For all his influence, and contrary to what many cynics think, Ecclestone cannot impose such big decisions on the officials of the FIA, upon whose shoulders ultimate responsibility for all sporting and regulatory matters lie. My instinct that they had little time for the chicane plan was confirmed when I saw the key people as they left the circuit. It just couldn't be done, was the gist.

However, those guys report to Max Mosley, who was back in Europe. If he agreed with the idea, he had the power to make things happen. It was around 2:00am in Monaco when the Michelin meeting took place, and even Bernie wouldn't call Max that late to sound him out. Nothing could happen until the morning.

The other side of the question was what Ferrari thought. By this time Todt had gone to his hotel, but the rest of his management team were still present. They made it absolutely clear that the idea of a chicane was a complete nonsense, and that rules were black and white.

Anyway, I'd drawn a sample Bus Stop on a handy Indy map in a notebook. A senior member of the Ferrari team took it from me, drew a spectacular Hot Wheels style loop in the middle of Turn 12, and wrote 'Michelin Only' on it.

Dylan
24-06-2005, 02:00 PM
It was easy to mock, but perhaps the Ferrari folk hadn't realised quite what could unfold on Sunday. The attitude was that Michelin had screwed up, end of story. And what would happen if Bridgestone had been in similar trouble? They had a good point, as six versus 14 would have been a very different equation. Indeed FIA people shared that concern - what if we build a chicane to please Ferrari? How would that look?

The Michelin teams had put some serious thought into the chicane proposals. Team bosses and technical directors are no mugs, and they knew it had to be done properly. As an ex-driver, BAR sporting director Gil de Ferran offered advice, while McLaren helped to provide some provisional drawings. But when everyone eventually packed up and left, we were still in limbo.

Sunday June 19th

Fast forward to Sunday. The only news from all the Michelin research was bad - it was confirmed that there was no way that the Indy tyres could be raced under normal circumstances. And the Barcelona tyres were still off the menu.

Bernie Ecclestone, Charlie Whiting, Jean TodtMeanwhile an early morning phone call between Mosley and race director Charlie Whiting reaffirmed the FIA's position. Clearly any conversations between Max and Bernie had not produced the result the teams wanted.

Whiting composed a reply to the letter from Michelin requesting a chicane was composed. It basically said a chicane won't happen - why don't you just drive slowly round Turn 13?

This idea wasn't quite as silly as it sounded. Later the FIA told the teams that it would be willing to operate a speed trap, similar to that used in the pitlane. This could be done by asking the FOM technicians responsible for the cabling around the track to create an extra loop at Turn 13. Any driver breaking the speed limit, whatever that might be, would be penalised.

The key advantage of this, according to the FIA, was that it did not involve the Bridgestone runners in any way, unlike a chicane. However, the prospect of having two lanes of traffic running round the banking, with a huge speed differential, did have its drawbacks. Not least the fact that four of the guys in the high-speed lane would be the Minardi/Jordan rookies. How safe would that be?

FIA folk were also somewhat bemused to find that neither Michelin nor the teams had a specific figure for a safe speed limit. That lack of a suitable number was confirmed to me after the race by a leading team technical guy, who said that it was just taken for granted that the chicane would have taken off sufficient speed to make Turn 13 safe.

There was also a feeling in the FIA camp that Michelin didn't know for sure that speed through Turn 13 was the real cause of the problem, although that's not the impression I got from the Michelin camp. Anyway, it seemed to me one of the key aims was to specifically avoid a crash at high speed on the banking. Neutralising that corner would have been a major step in the right direction, even if other areas of the track were still vulnerable.

Gradually folk arriving in the paddock began to realise that something serious was up. The key event was a meeting held in Ecclestone's office in the paddock, which kicked off sometime after 9:00am.

Those in attendance, although not all from the very start, were Tony George (IMS); Pierre Dupasquier and Neil Shorrock (Michelin); Flavio Briatore and Pat Symonds (Renault); Nick Fry and Gil de Ferran (BAR); Sam Michael (Williams); Ron Dennis and Martin Whitmarsh (McLaren); John Howett and Tsutomo Tomita (Toyota); Peter Sauber; Christian Horner and Guenther Steiner (Red Bull); Colin Kolles (Jordan); and Paul Stoddart (Minardi).

Ferrari was not represented, despite the fact that the team's own office was right next door. Charlie Whiting was summoned, made a brief appearance to state the FIA's case, and left. Apart from that, the FIA was not present. But Max Mosley made regular contributions from the other end of a phone line, speaking to Bernie, George and Briatore.

I went along to doorstep at around 9:45am, to be ready to gather reactions when everyone emerged. A crowd of photographers and TV crews had gathered, with the same idea. Little did we know that it would be a wait of nearly two hours.

Fortunately, there was some interesting comings and goings, and the fact that some of the inside action was visible through the tinted glass helped the time pass. The main meeting area was mostly masked by partitions, but whenever anyone came out to make a phone call or a have a quick side discussion, they had nowhere to hide.

Here's how some of the action unfolded in front of my eyes as time marched on:
10:30am: Bernie leaves the main meeting and gets in a huddle with Stoddart and Kolles. He appears to be doing all the talking.
10:37am: Ecclestone emerges from the office. He briefly teases the waiting media before heading straight next door to Ferrari. He meets Todt.
10:43am: Ecclestone returns to the meeting.
10:50am: Tony George leaves, a look of exasperation on his face. He says nothing to the media. He doesn't come back.
10:58am: Frank Williams is escorted into the meeting by his personal assistant. He's usually a late arrival at the circuit, but it's a surprise to realise that he wasn't already there.
11:03am: Ecclestone and Briatore step out of the main meeting area for a private chat. Flavio is animated.
11:07am: Against expectations, the drivers suddenly appear. They've been in the drivers' briefing and have been called to the meeting by Ecclestone. Fernando Alonso leads the queue, but he wrong slots and heads up the paddock stairs. David Coulthard sees me and says, 'Is this Bernie's office?' One by one, the others follow him in. All except the Ferrari drivers.
11:09am: After a quick trip to the Ferrari office - presumably to seek the approval of Todt - Rubens Barrichello enters the meeting. He shakes hands with Juan Pablo Montoya. Michael follows a minute later and is welcomed by BAR's Nick Fry. Almost immediately Michael heads out again and returns to the Ferrari office. Has he had second thoughts?
11:12am: Michael is back, looking very nonchalant with hands in pockets. Ferrari team manager and sporting director Stefano Domenicali follows him in. Briatore appears to be doing most of the talking to the group of drivers. The Ferrari guys reportedly say that they personally have no problem with a chicane. Nick Heidfeld stands on a chair so he can see what's going on.
11:17am: Kimi Raikkonen leaves the meeting, to be followed by most of the other drivers. A handful stays behind to continue the discussions.
11.27am: It appears to be all over, as the team bosses leave. Only the two Michelin men stay behind, for a brief private chat, before they too bale out. Most of the participants say nothing and head straight back to their own offices.

Dylan
24-06-2005, 02:01 PM
Not that anyone knew exactly what to say, except Paul Stoddart, who as usual acted as a de facto spokesman for the group. He claimed that the race would go ahead with nine teams with a chicane - possibly with non-Championship status - or with two cars without a chicane.

Paul StoddartHis Wednesday statement detailed how desperate things were getting in that meeting: "Most present felt the only option was to install the chicane and race, if necessary, without Ferrari, but with 18 cars, in what would undoubtedly be a non-Championship race. We discussed with Bernie the effects of the FIA withdrawing its staff, and agreed among ourselves a race director, a safety car driver, and other essential positions, and all agreed that, under the circumstances, what was of paramount importance was that the race must go ahead. All further agreed that since we would most likely be denied FIA facilities, such as scales and post-race scrutineering, every competitor would instruct his team and drivers to conduct themselves in the spirit of providing an entertaining race for the good of F1."

We now had exactly an hour before the pitlane opened and the cars were scheduled to head out on to the grid. This was utter madness. It was obvious that there was now no time to do anything, and yet some key people seemed convinced that the chicane would have to happen, and that work was about to start.

Bumping into ITV's Jim Rosenthal, I suggested he ought to send a crew out to Turn 13 to see what was happening. "They're already there," he said. "And nothing is going on."

Up and down the paddock there were little huddles. Briatore was again in animated conversation, this time with Norbert Haug and FIA's Alan Donnelly, Max Mosley's key advisor and his eyes and ears at races. Flavio then took Donnelly to one side. The Brit seemed to be doing little else but using those ears.

At 12:03pm Bernie appeared at the 'poor' end of the paddock and talked briefly to Kolles, and then to Stoddart. Fry, Tomita and Horner joined in the latter gathering. Such discussions were now going on in public. Bernie looked pretty hassled. "It's nobody's fault," he muttered as he headed off.

Another meeting was convened in Bernie's office as the minutes ticked away, and it was clear that there was going to be no easy resolution. When 12:30pm came around, there came the sound of an engine firing up. It was Jordan's Tiago Monteiro, heading to the grid. Over the next couple of minutes, he was joined by Schumacher, Barrichello and Narain Karthikeyan. Clearly, Jordan wasn't party to any boycott agreement with the other eight teams represented in the earlier meeting. All the other drivers sat strapped in their cars in the garages.

Back at Bernie's office, things were really getting desperate. Red Bull team manager David Stubbs arrived and put his head round the door. What am I supposed to with my cars, he seemed to be asking? Finally, at 12:38pm, the bosses emerged once more.

"We are all going to the grid, anyway," said Toyota's John Howett. He didn't elaborate. Briatore looked more upset than ever, while Stoddart was seething. His thoughts about Kolles were certainly not for printing. After the race the Jordan boss said that he'd agreed merely that he would race, with or without the chicane.

It was a strange atmosphere on the grid, with more urgent conversations going on. The drivers already knew that they were only going to trundle round. Some of them were sorely tempted to do more that. Ron Dennis had both his hands on Kimi Raikkonen's shoulders, and was giving him a serious eyeball-to-eyeball pep talk. These guys have it in their blood to go racing on Sunday afternoons, and what they were faced with just didn't compute. They were as much victims as anyone else.

Interviewed live by ITV's Martin Brundle on the grid, Bernie had a chance to set the record straight, apologise on behalf of F1 for the unfortunate situation that had arisen, even if it is out of his control. But his evasive replies shed little light - he really didn't seem to know what to say.

The rest, you know.

Conclusion

Max Mosley has given his reasons for not allowing a chicane to be built, and some of them are very valid. In normal circumstances, a sport has to stick to its rules. However, the balance of opinion, to use the sort of phrase that Max often employs himself, is that the reasons in favour of a chicane were far more pressing.

Chief among his objections is that he didn't want to do anything to inconvenience the Bridgestone teams. But he says the whole business was nothing to do with Ferrari, and in turn Jean Todt says that it's the FIA's job to sort these things out, and nothing to do with him. Which of course is quite true, in theory.

After the race I asked Todt if he had spoken to Max over the weekend.

"I spoke with him, yes. But I wasn't the only one, I think everybody spoke with him."

So did Max want to know what he thought of the chicane?

"You know, I mean, Max has a very strong personality, and he has his people with whom he discusses, he has the director of the race, he has the clerk of the course, he has the stewards. I mean, to the question did I speak to him, I spoke with, yes."

But, I insisted, did Max ask if Ferrari would be happy with the chicane?

"No... He never asked me if we would be happy because he never thought that it was a possibility."

Fair enough, and you can't blame the guy for throwing up his hands and saying, it's not my problem.

But let's suspend reality and suppose that, early on Sunday morning, Todt had said something like the following to Max: 'I really don't want to do this, but the USA is our biggest market, Philip Morris is American, Shell are huge here. And Bridgestone/Firestone has had a lot of grief in the States over the past few years. The tifosi are not going to like this either. Remember Austria? I can see all this landing on my head, and Luca di Montezemolo is going to go ballistic if we get the blame. We just can't be seen to screw F1 up. So let's give them the chicane. I think we can beat them anyway."

If such generosity sounds far-fetched, what if he was able to add the following rider: "They've said they're going to give us all the points. How can we sort that out?"

If Todt had made such a suggestion, would Max Mosley really have found it so necessary to stick to his guns?

I suspect that Sunday was clouded by confusion over what was really on offer, and by whom. As noted, in his 3:30pm press briefing on Saturday, Ron Dennis was talking about putting the six Bridgestone cars at the front in return for use of the Barcelona tyres. Not much of a deal, really.

But by the next morning, with the clock ticking, the stakes had been raised so much that there was talk of the Michelin teams racing for no points. But did the message get through? Absolutely not, I can confirm. I asked Todt after the race, and he confirmed that he had never heard that particular version.

"Bernie came this morning to see me with different proposals, including a chicane, but again it's a matter of the FIA, it's not a matter of the commercial rights holder. And I said for me, it's up to the FIA to decide.

"I heard that the teams were prepared to offer the Bridgestone teams to start in front, but I mean it's completely nonsense. We did qualifying yesterday for the starting order."

Crucially, Todt confirmed that no other team principals had approached him or made any offers. Everything was thus channelled through Bernie.

This then begs the question, what did Bernie Ecclestone really say to Jean Todt in their six minute chat that began at 10:37am? Did he fully convey what the teams were offering? If not then, how much (if any) contact did the pair have about other potential compromises as the day went on?

On Sunday afternoon I was convinced that Bernie Ecclestone was as helpless as the rest of us in all this, that he had to a degree been publicly humiliated, and as someone said, made to look like an Emperor with no clothes. This time, it was the rest of the teams and Bernie, versus Max and Ferrari. Surely, I thought, the relationship between Mosley and Ecclestone was now irretrievably out of balance.

I'm still inclined to that view, but was it really the case? Let's take a conspiracy theorist's view and just suppose that Bernie was, as so often in the past, playing the long game. The Indy situation just happened to break in the middle of a heated political battle, and while he appeared to be pushing one cause, perhaps in the background he was pursuing quite different ends. Just a theory, but it makes you think, doesn't it?

Hondavirgin
24-06-2005, 02:59 PM
ease up mate, i know it wasn't an interview, it clearly says that its a press release from the FIA. Mosely was referring to other sports to show how ridiculous the situation was. But the fact remains, it is a sport, that sport has rules, the rules were enforced.

That article is good, it is unbiased, i don't particularly like mosely, but i'm sticking to my view that in this case the right thing was done. I thought the same thing with Stoddart's dodginess in australia. What do you want? Flexible rules? I'm glad the SPORT i love is just that, a sport, and not a motorised version of ballet or some other art/entertainment.

Dylan
24-06-2005, 05:53 PM
Yeah, and its not much of a sport either with only 6 cars on the grid.

Vivski
25-06-2005, 06:16 AM
LMAO, HAHAHAHAHA. That was hilarious. Max Mosley is so full of shit. Lol, it really shows in his "Question" and Answer session that he was not there in the US. He just has no idea.

Stoddart is very biased. All the subjective crap in his article can be ignored, but it seems like he got most of the facts right.

Without wanting to go into a full blown discussion about what is and is not a sport, I'm going to disagree with you Hondavirgin. What is the point of a sport like F1 if it is not a show? F1 survives because it is a show. It is a sport and it would be no less a sport if a fair compromise was found. A sport is less of a sport when it is unfair. A fair solution could have been found where the right people got points, the right people got penalised and a show was put on so everyone could leave happy. I really don't think people would be complaining about how unsport-like a non-championship race would have been.

HAHAHAAHHAAHAHA, oh Max you crack me up. "We told them they could use the tyre, but that the stewards would undoubtedly penalise them to ensure they gained no advantage from breaking the rules by using a high-performance short-life tyre just for qualifying." Lol, so short-life that it explodes after a handful of laps. The problem was so obviously a fundamental problem for all Michelin tyres, not just a case of selecting a higher performance tyre. Seriously Max, come on!
In the end it didn't matter, 'cos the tyres Michelin had planned to send over failed testing so they would have had exactly the same problem.

kenshin
25-06-2005, 07:07 AM
what a tool max is...

lol

as it wasnt hard enough to entice the yanks away from the champ cart series to f1 already

LUD02C
25-06-2005, 10:57 AM
Max is just being immature about it now.
I wonder what the drivers organisation didn't step in?

If they did I didn't hear about it.

Hondavirgin
27-06-2005, 08:59 AM
ok, i understand you're points, but i still don't think a chicane was the right answer, its sets a terrible precedent that if you have enough power you can basically change the rules to suit your teams, i.e. in this case, slow down the track so you can be competitive.

And again, if the situation was reversed, no-one would even comment, so how fair is that for Ferrari!?

nEUROtic
27-06-2005, 09:43 AM
It wasnt the right answer in terms of the sport and championship. By getting rid of the championship part of it (ie, no points) then it was the right answer as all the fans got to have a show, albeit one that didnt count to the championship.

It doesnt mean **** about whether its a sport or nething. What makes a sport is the fans. And they shoulda been foremost if everyones mind.

Hondavirgin
27-06-2005, 10:09 AM
what would have happened if a michelin runner had taken out a bridgestone runner then? would the michelin runners have to give way to bridgestone runners? what about if a Minardi has to give way to a faster car lapping it if it will hurt its own race against the jordans?

hihidamon
27-06-2005, 11:06 AM
what would have happened if a michelin runners had taken out a bridgestone runner then? would the michelin runners have to give way to bridgestone runners? what about if a Minardi has to give way to a faster car lapping it if it will hurt its own race against the jordans?
exactly! It just didnt seem to be fair for the six bridgestone runner (no matter who they are) to have someone running illegal/unsafe tyres around the track even though they would not take any championship points. There might have been clashes between bridgestone and michellin runners which would have taken any points away from bridgestones.

What if BAR Honda were allowed to race in the Monaco and Spanish GPs but would score no points? That would have make them good shows for the fans and for F1, but what was the point of having race ban as penalty?

Rules are rules, you can't change the rules to suit any competitors simply because they werent prepared for the event or made mistakes.

LUD02C
27-06-2005, 04:21 PM
hihidamon, nEUROtic and Hondavirgin.

Everything you have said on page 14 (this page) I agree with.
Rules and rules but if a Michelin was racing for no points and hit a Bridgestone or just the idea of putting a chicane in to me is ludacris.

But, if ferrari had the problem, everyone would be like this "so, its there fault"
"don't race, CHEATERS"

LUD02C
27-06-2005, 04:30 PM
To lighten up this thread

http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y128/domenic10/Michelin.jpg

jackosimm
27-06-2005, 05:46 PM
HAHAAHAH thats golden!!!! lol great find :thumbsup:

^^v
27-06-2005, 09:07 PM
Mosley unmoved by Indy criticism
The US Grand Prix saga continues...
http://f1.racing-live.com/img/l3.gif
http://f1.racing-live.com/img/vide.gif


http://f1.racing-live.com/photos/imgactu/05/mosley-barcelona_080505_220x152.jpg
A big week ahead for Mosley and the FIA
The aftermath of the US Grand Prix fiasco rumbles on and will do for some time yet. The finger pointing continues with some, including Minardi boss Paul Stoddart, blaming FIA President Max Mosley for the Indianapolis mess.

"Stoddart is a sad case," Mosley said in an interview with the Guardian newspaper. "I helped him tremendously when the other teams were trying to steal his money. But now my reaction is that he's obviously forgotten to take his medication."

Mosley's Sunday afternoon just over a week ago was not the relaxed affair he had been hoping for. Instead he spent the day fielding calls from the key players at Indianapolis.

"The teams had gone into headless chicken mode," Mosley told the paper. "One of their suggestions - made more after the event - was that everyone should run with the chicane and only the Bridgestone teams would score points. Bernie would've probably been happy to compromise because his job is to maximise profits. My job is to run the sport absolutely fairly for everybody and not put anybody at risk. Bernie understood that it was not possible for me to give in."


"I had lots of calls from Bernie, Ron Dennis and Flavio Briatore," Mosley continued. "The interaction with Flavio was difficult because he did not make any coherent point. Ron was more rational. With regard to switching to Bridgestone he made the valid point that without testing there could be no safety - which was my precise point about the chicane."

Moving on a week and the seven team's and Michelin are busy preparing for a hearing in Paris. Mosley admits that he would not exclude a 'ban or two' as a result of the hearing by also added that until everyone has made their case, it cannot be clear what punishment, if any, will be imposed.

f1live.com

hihidamon
28-06-2005, 12:45 PM
hihidamon, nEUROtic and Hondavirgin.

Everything you have said on page 14 (this page) I agree with.
Rules and rules but if a Michelin was racing for no points and hit a Bridgestone or just the idea of putting a chicane in to me is ludacris.

But, if ferrari had the problem, everyone would be like this "so, its there fault"
"don't race, CHEATERS"
and one last fact on this indy crisis, people thought bridgestone has an unfair advantage at indy with their extra track info... i think thats bullsxxx u know... bridgestones invest alot (to supply firestones for indycar racing.. they sure deserve the extra info..... This is an advantage by competing in different catagories in worlds motorsports, same as Michellin who dominates the motogp, they sure have plenty of advantage over bridgestones at certain circuits also. Michellin can enter irl and race and get info if they want the up to date track details...

See ironically now its the french gp, home and test track for michellin, who is saying michellin has unfair advantageover bridgestone at this venue??? :D

Hondavirgin
28-06-2005, 01:23 PM
i read that michelin actually don't have much data on this track as the F1 teams don't tend to test there.

Vivski
29-06-2005, 01:32 AM
Haha, great pic Jase!
Well, although the rumbling continues, I'm over the US GP stuff. As long as there are no penalties levelled the championship will get back to normal.

Does anyone know what was actually causing the failure of the Michelin tyres? I know it was heavy load on that corner and the diamond cut made it abbrasive, but what part of the tyre was actually failing? Seems to have little to do with Michelin pushing the boundaries and more about that corner finding some weakness in the design of the tyres.

LUD02C
29-06-2005, 04:49 PM
Vivski - It was the acutal carcus of the tyre that was no good. ;)

LUD02C
30-06-2005, 03:39 PM
Update:

THE seven teams using Michelin tyres, which failed to start the US Grand Prix at Indianapolis, have been found guilty by the FIA on two of five charges.

They were cleared of the other three and the sport's governing body said it had decided to adjourn discussion of any penalties until an extraordinary meeting on September 14.



The teams were found guilty of failing to ensure they were in possession of suitable tyres for the June 19 grand prix but with strong mitigating circumstances.

The seven – championship leader Renault, McLaren, Williams, Toyota, Red Bull, Sauber and BAR – were also found guilty by the world governing body of wrongfully refusing to allow their cars to start the race.

They were cleared of refusing to race subject to a speed restriction, combining to make a demonstration and failing to inform the stewards of their intention not to start.

Michelin, whose failure to provide appropriate tyres for the track conditions to the seven teams which led to the boycott on safety grounds, will not be subject to any sanctions.

"We can't impose a penalty on Michelin," said FIA president Max Mosley. "They have no more of a relationship with us than any other team supplier. We have no power over them."

On Tuesday, Michelin offered to reimburse disgruntled fans at Indianapolis, many of whom walked out in disgust when only six cars representing three teams who were using another brand of tyres contested the grand prix.

Mosley said: "We are hoping the Michelin teams will make sure that what Michelin has suggested they do is done and not just talked about."

<DIV id=promoIslandRight>Advertisement:
on error resume next ShockMode = ( IsObject(CreateObject("ShockwaveFlash.ShockwaveFlash.5")))if ( ShockMode

Vivski
30-06-2005, 08:02 PM
"... adjourn discussion of any penalties until an extraordinary meeting on September 14." [read: until they know how many points to deduct so Ferrari wins]

"The teams were found guilty of failing to ensure they were in possession of suitable tyres for the June 19 grand prix but with strong mitigating circumstances." I'll say strong mitigating circumstances!! LOL. What were they meant to do?